Posted on 12/11/2017 1:02:58 PM PST by JP1201
The Shaver case is well beyond politics. There is nothing conservative, liberal or constitutional about an agent of the state killing an American without just cause. It is deeply wrong regardless of party or ideology. Bernie Sanders voters and the most ardent Trump supporters all should be united in outrage over the death of Daniel Shaver.
Maricopa County District Attorney Bill Montgomery got it right by charging Brailsford with second degree murder. The jury got it very wrong. Shaver should be alive, and his death must be taken as a call to action. Police departments should establish that a suspect always has the ability to show hands and lie down on the ground for arrest. Complicated law enforcement commands that require mobility and balance under threat of execution cannot be an acceptable standard.
When good faith efforts to respond to police commands can be met with a hail of bullets, we are all in jeopardy, and the work of all law enforcement officers becomes more difficult and dangerous.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
You’re not interested in discussing anything, you’re just advocating for this disgraced officer who murdered a man for jollies. I’ll continue to reply as I see fit. I don’t believe that’s a SWAT-able offense but with you, you never know. It’s all good to you no matter how many innocent people get splattered all over the walls.
There’s a lot getting proven here but not what you think.
Hmmmmm..... That sounds like one of Matt Bracken's books :)
[[officer who murdered a man for jollies.]]
[[Theres a lot getting proven here but not what you think.]]
It’s precisely what i think it is- Thanks for further proving it with the above statement
Keep telling yourself that, lickspittle.
Ahhhh the emotions of a hindsigher- every post you make proves my point—
At least I have that luxury and so do you, what with not being shot full of holes and dead and all. You really deserve to get it good and hard from an officer just like Brailsford, you really do. Karma come.
[[You really deserve to get it good and hard from an officer just like Brailsford, you really do. Karma come.]]
wow- just wow- keep posting regulator- you are completely proving my point now- you’re on a roll
unbridled hateful emotions are the hallmark of hindsighters-
I actually approve of the killing of Oscar Grant.
He was a bad person who deserved death.
Society is safer now that he is dead.
Oh no, step up and put your money where your mouth is. I want you to have a run-in with a bad cop with his gun in your face barking irrational contradictory orders. Let’s see how well you do, if you survive I expect a full report.
Making excuses for bad cops who kill people is the purview of hindlickers.
[[At least I have that luxury and so do you, what with not being shot full of holes and dead and all]]
Pssst- well by golly thank goodness
I didn’t shove a gun out q window and pointed it out at a highway highway full of cars- causing the police to get a report of shots fired and man with a gun- and i didn’t disobey direct clear orders and put myself into a bad bad situation either- yet i deserve to die? Lol- whatever fella- again, please keep posting- your emotions are amusing
Neither did Shavers, you’re just making *hit up now, hindlicker.
I’ve had several run ins with hte law- 2 at gunpoint- both undeserved- and i survived just fine obeying their orders-
there was nothing irrational about “Do not move your hands to your back” Nor anything else that was ordered in the case being discussed- He was told to crawl- the police allowed him to uncross his legs and put his hands down- without issue- it turned deadly only AFTER the man directly disobeyed the cop and reached his hand behind him for the second time- Had the fella kept crawling like he was ordered to do everything would have been fine - he didn’t- he qwuickly swung his hand behind him and hte cop had a split second to make a decision-
You keep forgetting this fella was accused of pointing a gun at traffic- and someone said shooting the gun- which later turned out to be false- but the cop did NOT have the luxury of knowing that at that time- for all he knew, and rightfully so- the fella had a gun tucked into his pants- Yuo keep leaving all that out and claiming the kid was ‘totally innocent’ despite the cop not knowing that at the time - you are looking back in hindsight now knowing NOW that the fella didn’t infact have a gun- and emotionally calling the scene based on that- you have the luxury of hindsight- the cop did not
I’ll do just fine in any situation where a cop expects me NOT to reach behind my back- it’s pretty cut and clear that that is a big big no no- not too hard to understand
not making anything up- Gonna have to call you kid from now on since you like using childish rhetoric- Those are the facts- objective facts-
he absolutely DID disobey orders- twice- the cops were lenient with hte first time which was more than he deserved- but the second time was the fella’s undoing reaching behind his back again- against direct orders- it’s not i making *hit up as you put it- The girl even stated he pointed it out window- and i believe the other fella in room at the time did too- Those are facts- objective facts- what you are claiming is false-
You’re really gold plating that false police report to back up your untenable situation. You’re supporting a total dickhead who was removed from the force before this abomination went to trial. Hang your hat on an unstable a-hole who clearly couldn’t cut it, go right ahead. If you’re still here to ping you will be, to the massive civil suit that everybody knows is coming. You can spin your silly yarns in defense of a demonstrably bad cop some more, and it’ll be just as stupid then as it is now.
I guess it’s OK to call you a rigid old fart living in a Mayberry fantasy world, then.
whatever kid, buh bye
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.