Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ...
7
8
9
  1. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by PassingBy View Post
    As a person that actually used hallucinogenic drugs - they don't make you superhuman.
    You don't just drop some acid and suddenly become able to fight off 4 trained policemen.
    You might be less responsive to pain, things like pepperspray etc.

    It doesn't help you against a bullet, as the case shows.
    It also doesn't stop your body from reacting to electrical current. And the tasers that the police use - they don't just hurt, they make most of your muscles spasm, making it really really hard to reach into a car, take out a gun, turn around with that gun towards the cops, aim, and then shoot it.

    If it is not realistic to try and shoot a person's legs for a person who is specifically trained to shoot stuff, how realistic is it for a guy on pcp to reach into a car, find a gun, take it, turn around, aim it, shoot it, all while being shocked by a taser?
    Acid is completely different to PCP. PCP affects pain receptors, effectively it can neutralize shock responses that would normally prevent you from doing things, such as moving while you have a bullet in your stomach. To somebody not on PCP, getting shot would be a WORLD of pain, and would instantly floor you, if hit anywhere in the torso. With PCP, you wouldn't really feel it. It's completely different to Acid, which merely stimulates parts of your brain to give good feelings and visual imagery.

    PCP can affect muscle responses with tasers, it affects your body quite a lot more than you seem to think. It's pretty damn realistic. Here's a story about one such incident where drugs can affect taser effectiveness: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crim...icle-1.2351706

  2. #162
    The Unstoppable Force Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    22,950
    Quote Originally Posted by TITAN308 View Post
    With all that side, blunt objects (including fist, feet, pipes, etc etc) do in fact kill more people every year than shotguns and rifles combined in the United States. While I understand your point within context of how we identify people as being armed or not I want to share that tid bit of info to at least make sure people have a more broad understanding of blunt objects and how someone being armed may end up being irrelevant as far as overall safety goes.

    - - - Updated - - -



    But that is exactly why we have juries.

    We have to have some form of decision making. If 6-12 of your peers can look at something and all come to the same conclusion, while not perfect, its about as good as it gets.

    If you don't like juries you might as well not like SCOTUS or any other entity that ultimately makes a final decision.

    And juries don't make mistakes?


    OJ?
    Casey Anthony?


    Quote Originally Posted by Knadra View Post
    Yes and I think that humans in a court of law who are formally presented all the evidence are less likely to make mistakes than humans on a World of Warcraft forum who read a news article.
    As those 2 names above show. Juries are not infallible.

  3. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    And juries don't make mistakes?


    OJ?
    Casey Anthony?




    As those 2 names above show. Juries are not infallible.
    It's almost as though juries are right 80-90% of the time and that those cases you mention are statistical outliers.

    hmm.

  4. #164
    The Unstoppable Force Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    22,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Noogai131 View Post
    It's almost as though juries are right 80-90% of the time and that those cases you mention are statistical outliers.

    hmm.


    So you are saying no one can ever complain about the results of a trial?


    Also why is this case not a outlier also?

  5. #165
    Man, I wish I could spend my adult life in the safe, echo-chamber-like shell of a university campus. Beats actually dealing with the real world in any way.

  6. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by atsawin26 View Post
    Man, I wish I could spend my adult life in the safe, echo-chamber-like shell of a university campus. Beats actually dealing with the real world in any way.
    then give me powers on a gaming forum so i can make it ultra liberal and ban anybody that disagrees! look mom, who is the bmoc now?

  7. #167
    Can I ask the ones that think the cop was in the wrong.

    What if after the fact it was proven that he indeed had a weapon in the car the that was ready and cocked to go that she couldn't have seen?

    Would she have then been justified in your minds?
    Last edited by Jarlathe; 2017-05-19 at 10:43 PM.

  8. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlathe View Post
    Can I ask the ones that think the cop was in the wrong.

    What if after the fact it was proven that he indeed had a weapon in the car the that was ready and cocked to go that she couldn't have seen?

    Would she have then been justified in your minds?
    Probably not. The cop should have just taken her death like a professional.

  9. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by BreakerOfWills View Post
    Jury said OJ was innocent, "A jury said" is no guarantee of justice.
    Criminally, yet another jury found him responsible for their deaths

  10. #170
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by sarahtasher View Post
    So I suppose here that edgelords think that drunk people or people to stoned to comply with police are an exclusivity to (insert dog whistle of your choice to mean ''Black'') communities in the USA ?

    You really think that French or Canadian cops don't deal with intoxicated people ? (Hint : without shooting them)
    As a French motherfucker i can tell you, they do, but usualy because we don't allow weird ass punk to posses a firearm and even then it's not legal to carry one around, which drasticly (<- i would like to put an emphasis on that) lower the chance of having intoxicated people pulling a boom stick on your ass.

  11. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by purebalance View Post
    Criminally, yet another jury found him responsible for their deaths
    So the first jury was wrong, proving my point. I never said a jury is ALWAYS wrong, so this whole "well another jury said" isnt disproving my point.

  12. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlathe View Post
    Can I ask the ones that think the cop was in the wrong.

    What if after the fact it was proven that he indeed had a weapon in the car the that was ready and cocked to go that she couldn't have seen?

    Would she have then been justified in your minds?
    When my uncle was a cop, he stated that he mentally assumes that people he confronts are armed and apparently has no issue restraining someone (i.e. on the floor or cuffs) he deems a threat. Shooting anyone based on assumptions is when mistakes are made, even if the assumption was spot on.
    The wise wolf who's pride is her wisdom isn't so sharp as drunk.

  13. #173
    Quote Originally Posted by BreakerOfWills View Post
    So the first jury was wrong, proving my point. I never said a jury is ALWAYS wrong, so this whole "well another jury said" isnt disproving my point.
    Ok if the second jury was right then you're somehow saying that's proof that this one is wrong. A jury isn't "wrong". That's not how juries work. It is "is there enough evidence to prove X beyond a reasonable doubt". Of course they can be tainted, but in this case I would say they'd be tainted to convict if anything so it's a non issue.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by sarahtasher View Post
    So I suppose here that edgelords think that drunk people or people to stoned to comply with police are an exclusivity to (insert dog whistle of your choice to mean ''Black'') communities in the USA ?

    You really think that French or Canadian cops don't deal with intoxicated people ? (Hint : without shooting them)
    Nope, it's more predominant in black communities when they AREN'T drunk or high in the US to not comply with a police officer. So take that and how about you stop being the edgelord

  14. #174
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You're literally making a "they're comin' right for us" argument that would justify a cop shooting literally anyone who didn't follow their immediate orders.

    That's insane, you realize that, right? All we're suggesting is that an officer should have to positively identify a threat before using lethal force. There's plenty of less-than-lethal options for other circumstances. Sure, they're not as effective as killing them would be, but you don't become a cop because you want to take the "easy road" of killing everyone who doesn't comply.



    Someone's using words inappropriately here, to manipulate emotions, and it ain't me.

    - - - Updated - - -



    In this particular case, where they shot an unarmed man for not being compliant enough? Absolutely. Let's be clear; by Shelby's own account, he wasn't obeying her orders, and she thought he was on drugs, and that's it. He had no visible weapons, he wasn't aggressive to the officers.

    In general? Nobody here is anti-cop.
    Have you ever taken a use of force class or a "shoot dont shoot" training scenario? No I am sure you haven't. I highly suggest doing so, as it will give you a much better perspective.

    High stress, high adrenaline situations are very tricky things. It is not as cut and dry as being able to tell a person is armed or not. You get tunnel vision, everything starts going through your head and every single person reacts to the stress differently. Its very easy to arm chair quaterback these situations.

    - - - Updated - - -

    And ask a Corrections officer how much damage a unarmed person can inflict upon you in the blink of a eye. And no person is unarmed. Numerous LEO have been killed by "unarmed" perps because they were able to get their weapon from them and kill them with it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by provaporous View Post
    First of all. they train them to never try to "shoot legs" that's not realistic, even a great shooter will miss that shot in the heat of the moment.

    Secondly, the toxicology report showed he was basically superhuman at the time of death and even outnumbered he was a threat, non-lethal means might not have worked against him before he reached a gun and shot someone.

    I think the moral of the story is, comply and dont take multiple hallucinogens.
    Correct i have seen people high on PCCP take on about a half dozen LEO and ytoss them around like they were rag dolls. I have also seen these guys take a full mag of 9mm and still be functional enough to kill.
    Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •