Wisconsin police shoot a Black man in the back as his children watch from a vehicle

[Meathead]

4 minutes ago, Woody said:

They still had an opportunity to roll him up.  His back was to the cops for a good six seconds before he opened the driver's side door.  The cops allowed him to control the situation up to the point where they shot him. 

You may have a point there. I know precious little about police procedure, I just know what makes sense. I'm not sure what you mean by rolled up, but if he had already gone for one of their guns I know that they are trained to let him go, back up, and train their weapons on him while giving him orders not to move. That seems entirely reasonable to me, and if that's what happened then they don't have time to holster their weapons and go try to tackle him without putting themselves at serious risk of him evading them and getting to a weapon especially a gun in his car

[Woody]

7 minutes ago, Meathead said:

You may have a point there. I know precious little about police procedure, I just know what makes sense. I'm not sure what you mean by rolled up, but if you had already gone for one of their guns I know that they are trained to let him go, back up, and train their weapons on him while giving him orders not to move. That seems entirely reasonable to me, and if that's what happened then they don't have time to holster their weapons and go try to tackle him without putting themselves at serious risk of him evading them and getting to a weapon especially a gun in his car

Roll Up = Tackle his ass to the ground and cuff him.  He had his back turned to TWO trained police officers for six seconds.  They could have apprehended him and regained control of the situation.  I know it's easy to armchair QB this stuff, but six seconds feels like "all day" when the shit gets real.  

 

[Woody]

10 minutes ago, jc856 said:

“Cops shot an unarmed dude, yo! Let’s burn it down!”.  Fuckheads.

That's the problem with our country.  We're quick to jump to conclusions.  Everybody is wrong by default.  If we were smart, we would wait until all of the facts were presented before flipping out. 

 

[jc856]

Cops should be paid 63 trillion dollars a year

[jc856]

8 minutes ago, Woody said:

Roll Up = Tackle his ass to the ground and cuff him.  He had his back turned to TWO trained police officers for six seconds.  They could have apprehended him and regained control of the situation.  I know it's easy to armchair QB this stuff, but six seconds feels like "all day" when the shit gets real.  

But you have to holster your weapon

[Woody]

2 minutes ago, jc856 said:

But you have to holster your weapon

You can flick on the safety and holster your weapon in less than one second.  But I'm done.  I wasn't there, and I wasn't in their shoes.  It just appears to me that there was a little more fuckin' around there than there needed to be. 

 

[jc856]

11 minutes ago, Meathead said:

You may have a point there. I know precious little about police procedure, I just know what makes sense. I'm not sure what you mean by rolled up, but if he had already gone for one of their guns I know that they are trained to let him go, back up, and train their weapons on him while giving him orders not to move. That seems entirely reasonable to me, and if that's what happened then they don't have time to holster their weapons and go try to tackle him without putting themselves at serious risk of him evading them and getting to a weapon especially a gun in his car

This is why I keep bringing up the subject of behavior. 90% or more of this stuff would never happen if there was compliance. Hate the cops all you want. Feel free to think they are treating you unjust. Whatever. But the minute you let your emotions get the better of you and you resist, then it’s on you. 
 

right now it seems like blacks want to have the equality they have every right to expect, and then some. I certainly don’t lose any sleep when a white person acting like this gets shot. Fuck ‘em.

[DannyBoy]

Here's part of the info I read.  I am looking for the by-line on his outstanding warrant and the reason he got the polices'  undivided attention at the stop.  

 

https://www.rt.com/usa/498867-kenosha-shooting-criminal-record/

https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3877395/posts

 

[Meathead]

50 minutes ago, Woody said:

Roll Up = Tackle his ass to the ground and cuff him.  He had his back turned to TWO trained police officers for six seconds.  They could have apprehended him and regained control of the situation. 

keep in mind youre counting the seconds as if he had continued walking. at any moment he could have sprinted which would have drastically reduced the cops chance to subdue him before he put everyone in that area in danger

also, unless the cops were incompetent dicks (possible), they already had their weapons drawn and trained on him. that tells me he already demonstrated himself as a threat, with my bet being he went for their guns bc thats a standard gangstaholic nigga move. thats what happened to alton sterling, the big guy they shot lying under the front tires of a car after they tried to take him down and he kept reaching for their guns and the gun in his pocket. thats why you see both cops suddenly release him and draw their weapons while warning him to stop reaching towards his gun. he didnt listen

like ive said, most of the country, especially blacks, are literally brainwashed that they are doing some kind of fucked up MLK opposite world shit by provoking the cops. the gangstaholics literally try to goad the cops into shooting them so that they become famous. its so super fucked up its hard to get your head around it sometimes

[DannyBoy]

https://www.facebook.com/realmikethecop/

Some of this after reading it is speculation on Mike the Cop's part but he was using factual information to draw a picture.  

I've been inundated by people asking my thoughts on the Kenosha/Jacob Blake shooting. Here's my take:

1. Don't forget the media has an agenda and it tends to not involve waiting for full information before rocketing their version in front of as many uninformed people as possible.

2. Police were called because Jacob Blake was waving a knife around and in conjunction with a domestic situation (not because he was roaming the countryside as a non-violent friendly fellow). While en route, dispatch informed police that Blake had an outstanding warrant in regard to his recent sexual assault and domestic abuse charges.

3. Police deployed a taser and it failed, as they are prone to do more than we'd like, despite being a great tool.

4. My research thus far, very early, is showing that Blake said he had a gun in the car and was going to go get it. He continued to brandish the knife while disregarding officer commands to drop it, which would have ended the situation PEACEFULLY, if he'd have complied with such lawful orders.

5. When he reached into the car, officers fired. Why? Because he already has one weapon and says he's getting a gun next from the location he's reaching into.

 

I'll continue to weather the public opinion storm and wait for all facts but these seem to be what has been established for me thus far

[Meathead]

see?

its a game to them. thats why i call it gangstaholism bc its like a disease of the mind

how much you want to bet he wanted the cops to shoot him? i know that sounds crazy but thats what they do, try to goad the cops to shoot them so they become famous

you may recall the incident when cops had to go into the projects to serve a warrant to a gang member. other gang members were assembled in front of the front door, some just standing, a bunch of others sitting in their cars. virtually all of them had guns openly displayed. all of a sudden you hear a screen door slam and a womans voice off camera saying "keith, dont do it! dont do it keith! listen to me!". what shes telling him not to do is jerk his hand near his weapon on his lap to try to get the cops to shoot him so that the papers can say the cops shot him even though he wasnt holding the gun

thats how diseased their minds are. its incredible

[JoeFerguson]

It certainly looked like he was going for a weapon. I don't see the cops doing anything wrong in that video.

[HipKat]

6 hours ago, LiterateStylish said:

Whether he was complying or not, you don’t shoot a person unless your life is in danger.

The ONLY thing I can possibly think of is that the officers thought he was going to the car to get a weapon.

I HOPE that’s what they thought.

But its still not right.

So the THREE cops could grab him - from behind - and take his unarmed ass down?? They had to shoot the guy in the back? 7 times?

[HipKat]

6 hours ago, Meathead said:

Are you inebriated? I'm not kidding, I'm asking for real, are you under the influence of something?

Because that is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen you post, and you have posted some doozies

I'm sitting here laughing in the most tragic way possible that you could even type that kind of completely fantasy driven rubbish and then press send

If any society made cops wait until they saw a Lethal Weapon before opening fire then we would never have anybody sign up to be a cop because thousands of cops would be getting killed every month. You might as well make a rule that the cops have to hand a gun to the suspect and see if he uses it before they get to use theirs because that makes as much sense

If you allow a suspect to get to a place where they might have a gun, or even just allow them to move in a manner were they could retrieve a gun hidden on their person, it is physically impossible for you to react fast enough to ensure your protection if you are made to wait until you see a weapon. 95% of the cops in this country would instantly resign if that was made the standard because they know the chances would be excellent that within the next few months they would be dead

You are not a dumb man. I'm sitting here in shock that you would post something so fucking stupid. I sure hope you are inebriated because if you're not then what hope do we have when at least half the country doesn't have the brainpower to see why we absolutely cannot let what this man did be the standard of acceptable behavior when cops are conducting a lawful and proper investigation

I'm sorry, I don't mean to offend you, but I can't believe you said that. Imagine yourself in that situation. Do you really think you can wait to see what he's going to do when he reaches the inside of that car without putting your life in serious and imminent danger? Absolutely real question that I would love to hear your answer

What was stupid about it? He was unarmed and out numbered. Again, he was UNARMED and OUTNUMBERED with THREE officers behind him. Not in front of him where he could do anything. How long does it take 3 guys to take down 1 FROM BEHIND where it's not possible to defend yourself, while he's in the act of opening a car door - where he would STILL have to take the time to duck down - making him MORE defenseless to reach or a potential weapon - that's not seen and we don't have any info there WAS a weapon.

I get where you come from on this stuff, but it seems like more and more, you're NEVER on the side of the victim, ever. 

Seven shots at point blank range - in the back. Yeah, that sounds justified

[HipKat]

5 hours ago, DannyBoy said:

The truth is now starting to come out, as you figured it would.  He had an outstanding 2nd degree felony warrant for domestic abuse and assault , they did tase him and it didn't work, he was threatening them with a knife he was carrying and he was heading to the car to get his gun, his words to the cops.  In the previous month he pulled a gun on a person and bartender owner and was pointing right at the other gun when the clip fell out of the gun.  The bartender told him to leave and as he was leaving he started pointing the gun at patrons through the front window.  The police already knew what they were dealing with so his added threat to get his gun gave them all they needed to protect themselves and anyone else.  Nothing yet on whether or not there was a gun but he was a high risk arrest and he was considered armed and dangerous.  

Good to know, but he was still unarmed and out numbered with is back turned to THREE officers

[HipKat]

5 hours ago, Woody said:

They still had an opportunity to roll him up.  His back was to the cops for a good six seconds before he opened the driver's side door.  The cops allowed him to control the situation up to the point where they shot him. 

Thank you! Exactly my points above

 

5 hours ago, Meathead said:

Just observe what the immediate assumptions are from most people

Most of the country has been absolutely brainwashed to respond in defense of a black suspect regardless of what their past history is and what they did to contribute to their incident

I'm sure Lit wasn't the only one proposing such a Preposterous standard as waiting to see if the suspect has a gun before opening fire

Without any further Evidence the immediate assumption by most people in this country right now is that the cops are automatically at fault. That is super fucked up

Dude, wtf do you expect over a few seconds of video of a man who's not armed getting shot in the back? Like we're supposed to know his history? Or what happened off camera? You can only go by what you see

 

[HipKat]

5 hours ago, jc856 said:

Cops should be paid 63 trillion dollars a year

Then what would Football players get?

[HipKat]

5 hours ago, DannyBoy said:

Here's part of the info I read.  I am looking for the by-line on his outstanding warrant and the reason he got the polices'  undivided attention at the stop.  

https://www.rt.com/usa/498867-kenosha-shooting-criminal-record/

https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3877395/posts

Got any from any outlets that aren't originating in Russia or a Right Wing Blog site???

 

Or THIS guy??

I'm Mike the Cop. I make (and share) content that I think is funny and/or engaging; you don't have to.

smh...

[Thebowflexbody]

2 hours ago, HipKat said:

Thank you! Exactly my points above

Dude, wtf do you expect over a few seconds of video of a man who's not armed getting shot in the back? Like we're supposed to know his history? Or what happened off camera? You can only go by what you see

Do you know exactly what rules of engagement these cops were being forced to follow?  Do you?  Whole new set of rules out there currently, buddy-boy.  Cops are not allowed to do their normal thing.  Had they been able to do what they normally do, doubt it ends this way.

[HipKat]

So it wasn’t a gun that was in his car, it was his children and it wasn’t him that was involved in a domestic dispute, he was there breaking up a fight. 

[travolta]

9 hours ago, Meathead said:

The media will be showing pictures of him when he was 12 years old

That is the playbook. 

[Thebowflexbody]

1 hour ago, HipKat said:

So it wasn’t a gun that was in his car, it was his children and it wasn’t him that was involved in a domestic dispute, he was there breaking up a fight. 

Good thing Hip was there.  He has all the facts.  LOL

[Meathead]

4 hours ago, HipKat said:

Thank you! Exactly my points above

Dude, wtf do you expect over a few seconds of video of a man who's not armed getting shot in the back? Like we're supposed to know his history? Or what happened off camera? You can only go by what you see

you do realize youre defending a violent career criminal with a killing knife in his hand, right?

[LiterateStylish]

11 hours ago, Meathead said:

Are you inebriated? I'm not kidding, I'm asking for real, are you under the influence of something?

Because that is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen you post, and you have posted some doozies

I'm sitting here laughing in the most tragic way possible that you could even type that kind of completely fantasy driven rubbish and then press send

If any society made cops wait until they saw a Lethal Weapon before opening fire then we would never have anybody sign up to be a cop because thousands of cops would be getting killed every month. You might as well make a rule that the cops have to hand a gun to the suspect and see if he uses it before they get to use theirs because that makes as much sense

If you allow a suspect to get to a place where they might have a gun, or even just allow them to move in a manner were they could retrieve a gun hidden on their person, it is physically impossible for you to react fast enough to ensure your protection if you are made to wait until you see a weapon. 95% of the cops in this country would instantly resign if that was made the standard because they know the chances would be excellent that within the next few months they would be dead

You are not a dumb man. I'm sitting here in shock that you would post something so fucking stupid. I sure hope you are inebriated because if you're not then what hope do we have when at least half the country doesn't have the brainpower to see why we absolutely cannot let what this man did be the standard of acceptable behavior when cops are conducting a lawful and proper investigation

I'm sorry, I don't mean to offend you, but I can't believe you said that. Imagine yourself in that situation. Do you really think you can wait to see what he's going to do when he reaches the inside of that car without putting your life in serious and imminent danger? Absolutely real question that I would love to hear your answer

It's not as crazy as you make it sound.

Or crazy at all, really.

There are two police officers with their guns loaded, cocked and ready to fire, aimed at the suspect.

There is very little chance of the suspect pulling out a gun, aiming, and firing before one or both officers riddle him with bullets.

The advantage is 100% with the officers.

Yes, I do believe you need to actually see a weapon before shooting.

The weapon may not have to be in the persons hands, but you have to see that he is reaching for some sort of weapon before ending their life.

Otherwise, you have police acting as judge, jury and elocutionary and all they have to say was "I think he was going to get a weapon".

[Thebowflexbody]

1 hour ago, HipKat said:

So it wasn’t a gun that was in his car, it was his children and it wasn’t him that was involved in a domestic dispute, he was there breaking up a fight. 

20/20 hindsight:  ALWAYS beneficial.  Not reality, though.