Posted on 01/28/2015 2:31:40 PM PST by kiryandil
Much better quality than the one on TV.
We also agree that you are a madman!
But let us investigate our agreement.
If you agree that the other two officers did nothing wrong, then you agree that her shooting was, in fact, justified, tragic though it may be.
Further, it would indicate that my assessment that the original officer’s actions are the only item at issue in this matter is correct, and I do believe that his actions are indeed questionable, though not where the shooting is concerned.
So, in summary, our difference lies in the fact you insist upon, ah, mass character assassination of the officer before any official investigation results are revealed, and my insisting that his side of the story should be obtained prior to rendering judgment, and further awaiting the statements of the Rangers on this.
I would also just like to point out that she sought him out, he did not seek her out. However, if he is found to have been involved in any wrong doing, then throw the book at his head I say.
I wouldn't have licked the boots of the Gestapo or the NKVD, either.
If you agree that the other two officers did nothing wrong, then you agree that her shooting was, in fact, justified, tragic though it may be.
Did you start drinking early today? Sounds like you've got a fifth of booze on board. That's drunk logic.
Nope, it’s perfect logic.
Seeing as “See! We agree on something, after all!” was said by you to me as it relates to the other two officers doing nothing wrong, and both of whom were, in fact, involved in shooting her, one with a taser which proved ineffective, and the other with a gun that proved effective,
You have, in effect, stated that her shooting was justified.
That is how YOU (*points in your face*) lost this exchange!
You should remember that for next time, because no doubt a another police shooting is just over the horizon...
Also, I do not drink at all, just for the record, and there no Gestapo or NKVD around, let the record further reflect.
chris, you flunked logic.
I made money on logic for 20 years. Talk to the hand.
I haven’t seen you disprove my assertion or counter it in any way other than silly insults and catch phrases.
Maybe you made money on logic for 20 years, but you haven’t made any today.
What you did today was agree that the shooting was justified by admitting that the other two officers who were involved in the shooting did no wrong.
That is how you lost this exchange, if I may be so bold as to point that out to you again.
But if you believe that you did something other than that by admitting that they did no wrong, hey, I’m all ears.
‘Splain it to me, Lucy.
IN MY FACE!!!
All our Koshtra are belong to chris37. LOL! :)
You're no ordinary idiot, chris. You work at it.
"Coignard’s aunt was told by police that video footage that includes audio exists." Fascinating.
Wonder why the coppers don't want to release that video/audio?
The other two officers most certainly shot her after she charged the other officer with a hunting knife, although it is worth noting that one of them shot her with a taser apparently.
And since you admit these two officers did no wrong, you also admit by extension that this action that they took was justified.
Officer Bagley shot at her, but may have been under the mistaken impression that Officer Derr was not actually an incompetent, dangerous buffoon.
The impression that she was under is that the officer's life was in danger, and she was right.
"You're no ordinary idiot, chris. You work at it."
I'm not any kind of an idiot. I'm the guy that you lost to.
"Wonder why the coppers don't want to release that video/audio?"
Nope. That evidence won't be hidden from investigators. Whatever is on it will be known to htem and us eventually.
There is nothing that the officer could have said to her that would make it okay for her to charge him with a knife and not okay for him to shoot her during the act of charging.
No, it's all about "winning". You're one of the more rabid idiots I've encountered in some time, chris.
You're wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
Where's the audio, chrissie?
Thanks, chris
I know that it was tough losing this debate, but you’ll get over it. :)
Not sure why he did a complete flip-flop and agreed to all my points, but I guess he realized that he was in the wrong.
The audio is in the hands of the investigators.
Where would you think the audio would be, besides there?
I’ve discussed the facts of this case the entire time, but since you can’t pay attention to anything other than your own lunatic blathering, I can see where you missed that fact.
I can’t help it that you admitted by implication that the shooting was justified. That was your mistake, and you cannot back peddle out of it no matter what, because it’s quite plain that a) the shooting was justified, and that b) you agreed with that fact by admitting that the second two officers did nothing wrong.
OOPS, DURR HURR, BOY DID YOU F*** UP HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
PWNED, S0N.
BETTER SKILL NEXT TIME, BUT I DOUBT IT ‘CUZ YOU AIN’T GOT NONE!!!!
Until such time, I will leave to to wallow in your hilarious defeat that you brought on all by yourself with your big, fat, stupid mouth.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey, what ever floats your boat.
Are you completely demented?
Nope.
Are you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.