You don’t have to reply, that’s fine. I can keep at this all night and will likely wear you out.
You keep implying that I’m a liberal. Yet you’re the one who’s seems much more comfortable with totalitarian government, not me. I’m a small government, leave me alone type conservative.
Oddly, out of where I do not know, but you brought up impeachment. Are you attempting to categorize me as someone who supported the impeachment? (”Oh no, I didn’t say that. I said you’re like the people who support it.”) Again, I’m the one who’s for small government, and you’re the one comfortable with a police state. I’m the one much more sensitive to government abusing their powers, not you.
Slipping in lies, huh? You can’t even recognize when someone is mocking you, can you? Remember when you sent me some sort of instruction manual on pellet guns stating not to drink and use them? You made a big deal out of it, like that’s a combination that justifies the taking of another’s life. That’s absurd, and you deserve to be mocked for it, whether you can tell you’re being mocked or not.
Look. We’re never going to see eye to eye here. I find it appalling that Shaver was murdered. You think a guy drinking with a pellet gun who pulled up his pants when he wasn’t supposed to deserves to be shot for not listening to the cops. We’re never going to agree on this.
However, if you do decide to respond, tell me why the lone unarmed hotel worker had more courage than five or six cops armed with semiautomatic rifles. In your links, it says she knocked on Shaver’s door when the people in the hot tub reported a guy pointing a gun out the window. He answered and she saw the pellet guns. It says so right in your links. Yet the armed cops couldn’t do that? They were so scared for their lives that a crying Shaver begging for his life makes one little move and they have to light him up? Maybe those cops should all be working at a desk in a hotel and that girl should be a cop.
From your first to this last reply, you’ve played hard and loose with the facts.
I’ve pretty much done what I can to call you on it, so yes, I’m done responding point by point when it does seem that you just want to try to wear me out, and waste my time in the process.
So I’ll address just one more piece of willful ignorance on your part and one more claim.
There are a lot of mistakes that people can make in life that may bring about their deaths, and recognizing that truth doesn’t mean you think a person “deserved” to die. It means sometimes a person’s mistake or mistakes can be deadly. I’m sure all that’s not news to you, though once again, you just ignore that truth.
On the hotel worker who went to the room, that argument apparently didn’t sway the jury, who considered that the police were going on the fact that he was seen pointing the rifle out the window, and that he was demonstrating very bad judgment. And by the article alone, we don’t even know what was conveyed to police, if anything, about her going to the room.
Yours is just the sort of “reasoning” that the left used against George Zimmerman, as I said. And the sort of reasoning that had two Democratic presidential candidates recently referring to Michael Brown’s shooting death by a police officer as a “murder.” It’s the same sort of reasoning that also got me to stop watching TV news after a lifetime of watching it up until then, and never expecting that I’d quit watching it.
It’s also the same sort of reasoning that encouraged the media to describe the death of another black man at the hands of police in Louisiana as “an execution,” and to bear false witness that a bystander video showed that he was pinned and couldn’t move at all when he was shot, when instead the video clearly shows him being able to pull back his arm. That same sort of reasoning also encouraged CNN to move the sound of the gun shots in the video, so the man appeared to be just lying there motionless when shot rather than struggling hand-to-hand with one of the officers, who had just noticed his gun.