RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me

RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/13/2018 1:49:12 PM)
FR I think the cops in this should be able to sue the swatter for putting them in this situation. Also, and more seriously, they should charge him with filing a false police report.

BamaD -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/13/2018 2:00:40 PM)
The victims family should sue the swatter for everything he will every make.

BamaD -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/13/2018 4:26:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 The guy that called in the prank call is being charged with involuntary manslaughter, among other things. source Involuntary manslaughter? Does that mean there's such a thing as voluntary manslaughter? I thought the whole distinction between manslaughter and murder was down to not deliberately setting out to kill somebody.

BamaD -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/13/2018 9:43:18 PM)
FR I was just reading on another board were there was a hooting in Oregon. They were called because of someone causing trouble just outside of town. The suspect, named Sabbe , Fired a dozen or so rounds at them. Once again, no dead cops so the anti cop faction assumes a bad shoot and a cover up. Once again we have no chance of a good shoot unless there is at least one cop on the ground bleeding when the first police round is fired.

WhoreMods -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 11:33:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods Did they find any evidence of the bloodbath they turned up expecting? I don't see why the fuck they should get the benefit of the doubt after shooting an innocent man over their assumptions. It's going to be the second time I've asked this particular question, though it will be the first time I've asked it to you. Fast Eddie couldn't be bothered, so I'll try you, instead. Have you really thought this whole thing through? Based on every bit of information, that you actually believe, and have internalized in a way that only people in certain professions will ever know, tell me, as a decent man, that you would need to SEE that particular blood bath. Keep in mind how many reported (and unreported) instances that you've been exposed to. People who really do kill their partners, and yes, people who really do set their own children on fire. Take the whole eight seconds to think about it. Yes. Mind you, I am saying that as a decent man, rather than as a cop who can get away with murder if he claims he didn't like somebody's body language, so that's just leftist propaganda, isn't it? quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 The guy that called in the prank call is being charged with involuntary manslaughter, among other things. source Involuntary manslaughter? Does that mean there's such a thing as voluntary manslaughter? I thought the whole distinction between manslaughter and murder was down to not deliberately setting out to kill somebody. You didn't know that and you dare to lecture us on the law. If you can't answer the question, just say so instead of whining: I'm genuinely curious as to what sort of manslaughter isn't involuntary, as that's the big distinction between manslaughter and murder. You plead ignorance of the existence of involuntary manslaughter. Lady pack gave you a good explanation of the difference. You were too busy trying to argue that no dead cops meant that the cop who shot the victim had to go to jail. Actually, I was arguing that no evidence of dead bodies at the supposed bloodbath meant that the cop was still culpable for shooting this poor sod regardless of how convenient it is to blame the whole thing on the wanker who phoned in a false report. I've not said anywhere in this thread that cops have no business shooting a suspect until they've been shot at themselves.

jlf1961 -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 12:08:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods Actually, I was arguing that no evidence of dead bodies at the supposed bloodbath meant that the cop was still culpable for shooting this poor sod regardless of how convenient it is to blame the whole thing on the wanker who phoned in a false report. I've not said anywhere in this thread that cops have no business shooting a suspect until they've been shot at themselves. And we have repeatedly told you, the man was shot at his front door BEFORE the cops could even get inside to see evidence of anything! As in, they never even had the chance to get inside and were following procedure at initial contact, as in the first few seconds or minute of arriving ON SCENE. I guess they should have done the Hollywood cliche kick the door in while other officers crashed through the windows thing after lobbing in a bunch of tear gas. You know, the fictionalized way that everyone seems to think that cops operate when stuff like this is called in. Or did you miss that part of the story that was linked to? Which is why, your entire argument basically supports the idea that you are saying, cops should not do a damn thing until they have been shot at. So lets recap: Dispatch gets prank call about one person murdered and hostages. Cops arrive on the scene and the guy opens his door when he sees cops out front. Cops tell him to keep his hands up and visible as soon as he opens his door. Dead guy does not follow instructions and is shot dead before the cops could even get inside to verify the fucking report called into dispatch. Of course, IF there had been people covered with gasoline, the sparks generated by the tear gas grenades and flash bangs would have ignited the gasoline.

WhoreMods -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 12:13:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 And we have repeatedly told you, the man was shot at his front door BEFORE the cops could even get inside to see evidence of anything! As in, they never even had the chance to get inside and were following procedure at initial contact, as in the first few seconds or minute of arriving ON SCENE. I guess they should have done the Hollywood cliche kick the door in while other officers crashed through the windows thing after lobbing in a bunch of tear gas. You know, the fictionalized way that everyone seems to think that cops operate when stuff like this is called in. Or did you miss that part of the story that was linked to? Which is why, your entire argument basically supports the idea that you are saying, cops should not do a damn thing until they have been shot at. To the extent that your argument is saying that people should play statues whenever talking to a cop in case they get shot because somebody's feeling paranoid, and nobody has any business complaining about unwarranted shootings by a cop who didn't like the look of somebody, I suppose, but both would be reading something into statements that isn't said, aren't they?

BamaD -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 12:15:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods Did they find any evidence of the bloodbath they turned up expecting? I don't see why the fuck they should get the benefit of the doubt after shooting an innocent man over their assumptions. It's going to be the second time I've asked this particular question, though it will be the first time I've asked it to you. Fast Eddie couldn't be bothered, so I'll try you, instead. Have you really thought this whole thing through? Based on every bit of information, that you actually believe, and have internalized in a way that only people in certain professions will ever know, tell me, as a decent man, that you would need to SEE that particular blood bath. Keep in mind how many reported (and unreported) instances that you've been exposed to. People who really do kill their partners, and yes, people who really do set their own children on fire. Take the whole eight seconds to think about it. Yes. Mind you, I am saying that as a decent man, rather than as a cop who can get away with murder if he claims he didn't like somebody's body language, so that's just leftist propaganda, isn't it? quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 The guy that called in the prank call is being charged with involuntary manslaughter, among other things. source Involuntary manslaughter? Does that mean there's such a thing as voluntary manslaughter? I thought the whole distinction between manslaughter and murder was down to not deliberately setting out to kill somebody. You didn't know that and you dare to lecture us on the law. If you can't answer the question, just say so instead of whining: I'm genuinely curious as to what sort of manslaughter isn't involuntary, as that's the big distinction between manslaughter and murder. You plead ignorance of the existence of involuntary manslaughter. Lady pack gave you a good explanation of the difference. You were too busy trying to argue that no dead cops meant that the cop who shot the victim had to go to jail. Actually, I was arguing that no evidence of dead bodies at the supposed bloodbath meant that the cop was still culpable for shooting this poor sod regardless of how convenient it is to blame the whole thing on the wanker who phoned in a false report. I've not said anywhere in this thread that cops have no business shooting a suspect until they've been shot at themselves. And you can't get it through your head that the victim grabbed for his waste band before the cops got inside the house where the evidence would have been.

BamaD -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 12:23:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 And we have repeatedly told you, the man was shot at his front door BEFORE the cops could even get inside to see evidence of anything! As in, they never even had the chance to get inside and were following procedure at initial contact, as in the first few seconds or minute of arriving ON SCENE. I guess they should have done the Hollywood cliche kick the door in while other officers crashed through the windows thing after lobbing in a bunch of tear gas. You know, the fictionalized way that everyone seems to think that cops operate when stuff like this is called in. Or did you miss that part of the story that was linked to? Which is why, your entire argument basically supports the idea that you are saying, cops should not do a damn thing until they have been shot at. To the extent that your argument is saying that people should play statues whenever talking to a cop in case they get shot because somebody's feeling paranoid, and nobody has any business complaining about unwarranted shootings by a cop who didn't like the look of somebody, I suppose, but both would be reading something into statements that isn't said, aren't they? It wasn't that they didn't like the look of him, it was that he GRABED FOR HIS WASTE BAND. You can't even tell the truth about what country you are from, how can you expect us to take anything you say seriously? BTW when I deal with cops I always Keep my hands in plain sight so there can be no misunderstanding..

WhoreMods -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 12:26:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods Did they find any evidence of the bloodbath they turned up expecting? I don't see why the fuck they should get the benefit of the doubt after shooting an innocent man over their assumptions. It's going to be the second time I've asked this particular question, though it will be the first time I've asked it to you. Fast Eddie couldn't be bothered, so I'll try you, instead. Have you really thought this whole thing through? Based on every bit of information, that you actually believe, and have internalized in a way that only people in certain professions will ever know, tell me, as a decent man, that you would need to SEE that particular blood bath. Keep in mind how many reported (and unreported) instances that you've been exposed to. People who really do kill their partners, and yes, people who really do set their own children on fire. Take the whole eight seconds to think about it. Yes. Mind you, I am saying that as a decent man, rather than as a cop who can get away with murder if he claims he didn't like somebody's body language, so that's just leftist propaganda, isn't it? quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 The guy that called in the prank call is being charged with involuntary manslaughter, among other things. source Involuntary manslaughter? Does that mean there's such a thing as voluntary manslaughter? I thought the whole distinction between manslaughter and murder was down to not deliberately setting out to kill somebody. You didn't know that and you dare to lecture us on the law. If you can't answer the question, just say so instead of whining: I'm genuinely curious as to what sort of manslaughter isn't involuntary, as that's the big distinction between manslaughter and murder. You plead ignorance of the existence of involuntary manslaughter. Lady pack gave you a good explanation of the difference. You were too busy trying to argue that no dead cops meant that the cop who shot the victim had to go to jail. Actually, I was arguing that no evidence of dead bodies at the supposed bloodbath meant that the cop was still culpable for shooting this poor sod regardless of how convenient it is to blame the whole thing on the wanker who phoned in a false report. I've not said anywhere in this thread that cops have no business shooting a suspect until they've been shot at themselves. And you can't get it through your head that the victim grabbed for his waste band before the cops got inside the house where the evidence would have been. Finch put his hands back up when he was told to stop going for his waistband, which makes the shooting seem a bit less clear cut than you're making out. The cop in question has been suspended pending an investigation, after all.

BamaD -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 12:35:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods Did they find any evidence of the bloodbath they turned up expecting? I don't see why the fuck they should get the benefit of the doubt after shooting an innocent man over their assumptions. It's going to be the second time I've asked this particular question, though it will be the first time I've asked it to you. Fast Eddie couldn't be bothered, so I'll try you, instead. Have you really thought this whole thing through? Based on every bit of information, that you actually believe, and have internalized in a way that only people in certain professions will ever know, tell me, as a decent man, that you would need to SEE that particular blood bath. Keep in mind how many reported (and unreported) instances that you've been exposed to. People who really do kill their partners, and yes, people who really do set their own children on fire. Take the whole eight seconds to think about it. Yes. Mind you, I am saying that as a decent man, rather than as a cop who can get away with murder if he claims he didn't like somebody's body language, so that's just leftist propaganda, isn't it? quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 The guy that called in the prank call is being charged with involuntary manslaughter, among other things. source Involuntary manslaughter? Does that mean there's such a thing as voluntary manslaughter? I thought the whole distinction between manslaughter and murder was down to not deliberately setting out to kill somebody. You didn't know that and you dare to lecture us on the law. If you can't answer the question, just say so instead of whining: I'm genuinely curious as to what sort of manslaughter isn't involuntary, as that's the big distinction between manslaughter and murder. You plead ignorance of the existence of involuntary manslaughter. Lady pack gave you a good explanation of the difference. You were too busy trying to argue that no dead cops meant that the cop who shot the victim had to go to jail. Actually, I was arguing that no evidence of dead bodies at the supposed bloodbath meant that the cop was still culpable for shooting this poor sod regardless of how convenient it is to blame the whole thing on the wanker who phoned in a false report. I've not said anywhere in this thread that cops have no business shooting a suspect until they've been shot at themselves. And you can't get it through your head that the victim grabbed for his waste band before the cops got inside the house where the evidence would have been. Finch put his hands back up when he was told to stop going for his waistband, which makes the shooting seem a bit less clear cut than you're making out. The cop in question has been suspended pending an investigation, after all. Then he went for his waste band again which is when the shooting took place. Again you show your ignorance, even if the cop was shot in the back an is in the hospital he is suspended for the duration of the investigation. And I never said I assumed it was a clean shoot I have just said there isn't PROOF it wasn't.

WhoreMods -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 12:49:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods Did they find any evidence of the bloodbath they turned up expecting? I don't see why the fuck they should get the benefit of the doubt after shooting an innocent man over their assumptions. It's going to be the second time I've asked this particular question, though it will be the first time I've asked it to you. Fast Eddie couldn't be bothered, so I'll try you, instead. Have you really thought this whole thing through? Based on every bit of information, that you actually believe, and have internalized in a way that only people in certain professions will ever know, tell me, as a decent man, that you would need to SEE that particular blood bath. Keep in mind how many reported (and unreported) instances that you've been exposed to. People who really do kill their partners, and yes, people who really do set their own children on fire. Take the whole eight seconds to think about it. Yes. Mind you, I am saying that as a decent man, rather than as a cop who can get away with murder if he claims he didn't like somebody's body language, so that's just leftist propaganda, isn't it? quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 The guy that called in the prank call is being charged with involuntary manslaughter, among other things. source Involuntary manslaughter? Does that mean there's such a thing as voluntary manslaughter? I thought the whole distinction between manslaughter and murder was down to not deliberately setting out to kill somebody. You didn't know that and you dare to lecture us on the law. If you can't answer the question, just say so instead of whining: I'm genuinely curious as to what sort of manslaughter isn't involuntary, as that's the big distinction between manslaughter and murder. You plead ignorance of the existence of involuntary manslaughter. Lady pack gave you a good explanation of the difference. You were too busy trying to argue that no dead cops meant that the cop who shot the victim had to go to jail. Actually, I was arguing that no evidence of dead bodies at the supposed bloodbath meant that the cop was still culpable for shooting this poor sod regardless of how convenient it is to blame the whole thing on the wanker who phoned in a false report. I've not said anywhere in this thread that cops have no business shooting a suspect until they've been shot at themselves. And you can't get it through your head that the victim grabbed for his waste band before the cops got inside the house where the evidence would have been. Finch put his hands back up when he was told to stop going for his waistband, which makes the shooting seem a bit less clear cut than you're making out. The cop in question has been suspended pending an investigation, after all. Then he went for his waste band again which is when the shooting took place. Again you show your ignorance even if the cop was shot in the back an is in the hospital he is suspended for the duration of the investigation. And I never said I assumed it was a clean shoot I have just said there isn't PROOF it wasn't. There isn't any PROOF that it was, either. There are accounts claiming he was shot, after he put his hand back up having jerked it back up too quickly for somebody's liking. Until some bodycam footage emerges, that's all hearsay, though.

BamaD -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 1:14:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods Did they find any evidence of the bloodbath they turned up expecting? I don't see why the fuck they should get the benefit of the doubt after shooting an innocent man over their assumptions. It's going to be the second time I've asked this particular question, though it will be the first time I've asked it to you. Fast Eddie couldn't be bothered, so I'll try you, instead. Have you really thought this whole thing through? Based on every bit of information, that you actually believe, and have internalized in a way that only people in certain professions will ever know, tell me, as a decent man, that you would need to SEE that particular blood bath. Keep in mind how many reported (and unreported) instances that you've been exposed to. People who really do kill their partners, and yes, people who really do set their own children on fire. Take the whole eight seconds to think about it. Yes. Mind you, I am saying that as a decent man, rather than as a cop who can get away with murder if he claims he didn't like somebody's body language, so that's just leftist propaganda, isn't it? quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 The guy that called in the prank call is being charged with involuntary manslaughter, among other things. source Involuntary manslaughter? Does that mean there's such a thing as voluntary manslaughter? I thought the whole distinction between manslaughter and murder was down to not deliberately setting out to kill somebody. You didn't know that and you dare to lecture us on the law. If you can't answer the question, just say so instead of whining: I'm genuinely curious as to what sort of manslaughter isn't involuntary, as that's the big distinction between manslaughter and murder. You plead ignorance of the existence of involuntary manslaughter. Lady pack gave you a good explanation of the difference. You were too busy trying to argue that no dead cops meant that the cop who shot the victim had to go to jail. Actually, I was arguing that no evidence of dead bodies at the supposed bloodbath meant that the cop was still culpable for shooting this poor sod regardless of how convenient it is to blame the whole thing on the wanker who phoned in a false report. I've not said anywhere in this thread that cops have no business shooting a suspect until they've been shot at themselves. And you can't get it through your head that the victim grabbed for his waste band before the cops got inside the house where the evidence would have been. Finch put his hands back up when he was told to stop going for his waistband, which makes the shooting seem a bit less clear cut than you're making out. The cop in question has been suspended pending an investigation, after all. Then he went for his waste band again which is when the shooting took place. Again you show your ignorance even if the cop was shot in the back an is in the hospital he is suspended for the duration of the investigation. And I never said I assumed it was a clean shoot I have just said there isn't PROOF it wasn't. There isn't any PROOF that it was, either. There are accounts claiming he was shot, after he put his hand back up having jerked it back up too quickly for somebody's liking. Until some bodycam footage emerges, that's all hearsay, though. Yep your basing your condemnation on hearsay. I want proof one way or the other. For you hearsay is enough. There is a rumor that Johnson had Kennedy killed, but I want proof before I demand proof that Johnson did it . Remember Jessy Jackson said Martin was shot 3 times in the back of the head and people like you were ready to form a lynch mob.

jlf1961 -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 3:59:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 And we have repeatedly told you, the man was shot at his front door BEFORE the cops could even get inside to see evidence of anything! As in, they never even had the chance to get inside and were following procedure at initial contact, as in the first few seconds or minute of arriving ON SCENE. I guess they should have done the Hollywood cliche kick the door in while other officers crashed through the windows thing after lobbing in a bunch of tear gas. You know, the fictionalized way that everyone seems to think that cops operate when stuff like this is called in. Or did you miss that part of the story that was linked to? Which is why, your entire argument basically supports the idea that you are saying, cops should not do a damn thing until they have been shot at. To the extent that your argument is saying that people should play statues whenever talking to a cop in case they get shot because somebody's feeling paranoid, and nobody has any business complaining about unwarranted shootings by a cop who didn't like the look of somebody, I suppose, but both would be reading something into statements that isn't said, aren't they? How in the fuck were the cops supposed to see evidence of a murder and hostage situation before they even got in the fucking house? Answer that one before you go into yet another tirade about how the cop was at fault. And, as far as playing statues, when you have a cop pointing a gun at you and tells you not to move, the wise move is to not fucking move period until told to do so by the officer pointing his gun at you, would you not agree?

BamaD -> RE: Why this hasnt hit the boards is beyond me (1/14/2018 5:42:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 And we have repeatedly told you, the man was shot at his front door BEFORE the cops could even get inside to see evidence of anything! As in, they never even had the chance to get inside and were following procedure at initial contact, as in the first few seconds or minute of arriving ON SCENE. I guess they should have done the Hollywood cliche kick the door in while other officers crashed through the windows thing after lobbing in a bunch of tear gas. You know, the fictionalized way that everyone seems to think that cops operate when stuff like this is called in. Or did you miss that part of the story that was linked to? Which is why, your entire argument basically supports the idea that you are saying, cops should not do a damn thing until they have been shot at. To the extent that your argument is saying that people should play statues whenever talking to a cop in case they get shot because somebody's feeling paranoid, and nobody has any business complaining about unwarranted shootings by a cop who didn't like the look of somebody, I suppose, but both would be reading something into statements that isn't said, aren't they? How in the fuck were the cops supposed to see evidence of a murder and hostage situation before they even got in the fucking house? Answer that one before you go into yet another tirade about how the cop was at fault. And, as far as playing statues, when you have a cop pointing a gun at you and tells you not to move, the wise move is to not fucking move period until told to do so by the officer pointing his gun at you, would you not agree? Only cops are expected to use common sense, and they can never shoot first. Don't you pay attention? No bleeding cops, the cops have to be wrong.

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 5 [6]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625