cop shoots man in the back

[WEB slicer]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/michael-slager-south-carolina-officer-charged-murder-black-man-n337526

[Undermood]

Officer shot at a unarmed black fatally again. He probably will face 30 years to life in prison or the death penalty. He deserved it. An an officer, he should have his principle at legal way to enforce the law. 

[umairsaleem]

Suddenly I am feeling lucky that I'm living a country where guns have been banned, there are many reason that U.S can't ban the guns, but the truth is guns do bring harm.

[BADecker]

Suddenly I am feeling lucky that I'm living a country where guns have been banned, there are many reason that U.S can't ban the guns, but the truth is guns do bring harm.

Here is what is wrong with this thinking, and why it is dangerous to think like this.

What would happen if all the guns in the world were banned? I mean, if guns were formally banned worldwide, would they really be banned? Or would there be certain groups of people who would still have them and keep them?

Personally, I believe that governments, militaries, some police, and criminals would still have guns. Governments, militaries, and police are made up of people. So are crooks. Sooner or later they would use the guns they had. There is no way to ban guns from everybody.

What is happening is, people in the United States are not exercising their rights to own and use guns for protection. They have become a bunch of sissies. If they were exercising their gun rights as they should, there would be a bunch of dead cops all over the place.

The fact that multitudes of people in the United States have and use guns is the reason that much of the world is free. If the people of the U.S. lost their guns, governments all over the world would step in and take the guns from everybody else. People in gun-free countries would go into slavery from their governments, because governments in gun-free countries still have guns to force the issue.

Enforced freedom is the only way. And the common people are the only ones who can enforce freedom. And the only way they can do it is with bigger and stronger and more powerful guns.

[freedomno1]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/08/us/south-carolina-officer-is-charged-with-murder-in-black-mans-death.html?_r=0

Video with all the details
Holy ****

[redsn0w]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/michael-slager-south-carolina-officer-charged-murder-black-man-n337526

Always in us, the land of freedom and equality or am I wrong? They are only poor bastards,? If the police wanted he could stop him without an useless kill (he could shoot in the leg for example).

[Vod]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/michael-slager-south-carolina-officer-charged-murder-black-man-n337526

Always in us, the land of freedom and equality or am I wrong? They are only poor bastards,? If the police wanted he could stop him without an useless kill (he could shoot in the leg for example).

Police are trained to shoot at the center of mass.  They repeat it over and over until it's reflex.  Once that cop made up his mind to shoot, the bullet was going to the center of mass.

[bryant.coleman]

Suddenly I am feeling lucky that I'm living a country where guns have been banned, there are many reason that U.S can't ban the guns, but the truth is guns do bring harm.

Stop BS. Police officers do have the right to possess firearms and to use them, even in countries (such as most of the EU nations) where the gun possession is banned for civilians.

[Lethn]

Suddenly I am feeling lucky that I'm living a country where guns have been banned, there are many reason that U.S can't ban the guns, but the truth is guns do bring harm.

Stop BS. Police officers do have the right to possess firearms and to use them, even in countries (such as most of the EU nations) where the gun possession is banned for civilians.

It is bullshit, here in the UK we've had incidents of people getting shot by the police, yet when a real emergency happens and a psychopath goes on a killing spree they're nowhere to be seen, I'm inclined to believe other Anarchists who claim that they aren't willing to risk officers to protect people and hold back until the worst of it is over. If you didn't know, the original Tottenham protests were about a guy getting shot by the police and a bunch of chavs decided to take advantage of the chaos. Also, in regards to my comments about a psychopath, we had a guy who went on a rampage with a shotgun, the police didn't do anything until he had pretty much gotten the majority of the people he wanted to kill and there were apparently two unarmed officers tailing him at the time.

If that isn't enough to tell you these gun control advocates are full of shit, there was that incident in Norway with Breivik, where were the men with guns to save people then? In that situation I'd be happy for a just a 9mm so I can at least have a chance and I don't even touch gun really.

[Miracal]

Suddenly I am feeling lucky that I'm living a country where guns have been banned, there are many reason that U.S can't ban the guns, but the truth is guns do bring harm.

It is not the question of holding a gun legally in this situation. It is about the the police officers who should use gun to protect the ppl and punish the criminal, not kill the innocent, especially the black. They still haven't learnt the lesson from Ferguson shooting.

[bryant.coleman]

If that isn't enough to tell you these gun control advocates are full of shit, there was that incident in Norway with Breivik, where were the men with guns to save people then? In that situation I'd be happy for a just a 9mm so I can at least have a chance and I don't even touch gun really.

Imagine what would have happened if at least 1% of the 400+ people in the Utøya island at that time were armed with guns. No more than 3 or 4 people would have lost their lives. Definitely not 77.

In a place where everyone is armed, a single person won't be able to mow down 77 people. And in Utøya, not even the policemen were armed. The results are for everyone to see.

[NUFCrichard]

I'm not usually too big on these stories, like in Ferguson, it is hard to say if the person was being threatening to the cop or not.
In this case it is pretty disgusting.  The policeman in question needs to go to jail for murder, plain and simple.

I do think there is some stereotyping by the police, if you see 100 black youths with guns, you probably assume the 101st has one too, but they can't shoot people in the back and not go to jail.

[Lethn]

If that isn't enough to tell you these gun control advocates are full of shit, there was that incident in Norway with Breivik, where were the men with guns to save people then? In that situation I'd be happy for a just a 9mm so I can at least have a chance and I don't even touch gun really.

Imagine what would have happened if at least 1% of the 400+ people in the Utøya island at that time were armed with guns. No more than 3 or 4 people would have lost their lives. Definitely not 77.

In a place where everyone is armed, a single person won't be able to mow down 77 people. And in Utøya, not even the policemen were armed. The results are for everyone to see.

And then people for gun control will tell you but all the accidents people will have with guns would just get people killed, but that's what training is for in my opinion, yeah, this is why these psychopaths go after unarmed people and not military bases, it's not coincedental.

You can measure how much contempt a government has for it's people by how willing they are to rush to the defence of their citizens.

[coinpr0n]

This again. It's sad to see yet another shooting ... there's got to be a better way for sure. But the damage is already done now, again.

[ShetKid]

I was just watching this on the news and then I see this. Kind of disappointing to see something like this again. You guys can see the video here: https://vimeo.com/124336782

[redsn0w]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/michael-slager-south-carolina-officer-charged-murder-black-man-n337526

Always in us, the land of freedom and equality or am I wrong? They are only poor bastards,? If the police wanted he could stop him without an useless kill (he could shoot in the leg for example).

Police are trained to shoot at the center of mass.  They repeat it over and over until it's reflex.  Once that cop made up his mind to shoot, the bullet was going to the center of mass.

So they are trained, but in this case there wasn't necessary to shot a man (in the back). He could shoot on the leg, and conclude the story with a simple arrest but all we know that the us police are thinking "I'm a hero".

[bryant.coleman]

So they are trained, but in this case there wasn't necessary to shot a man (in the back). He could shoot on the leg, and conclude the story with a simple arrest but all we know that the us police are thinking "I'm a hero".

Unfortunate incident. The cop had decades of experience in the police force with him. But a few seconds of misjudgment has resulted in the loss of one life.

[SellingMyGPUs]

So they are trained, but in this case there wasn't necessary to shot a man (in the back). He could shoot on the leg, and conclude the story with a simple arrest but all we know that the us police are thinking "I'm a hero".

How about he could have just ran behind him for 2 minutes and kicked him to the ground? Like in those 70's movies? Or is that not done these days?

The arrestant was 50 years old, the cop was in his 30's. Not much of a competition...

[waterpile]

So they are trained, but in this case there wasn't necessary to shot a man (in the back). He could shoot on the leg, and conclude the story with a simple arrest but all we know that the us police are thinking "I'm a hero".

Unfortunate incident. The cop had decades of experience in the police force with him. But a few seconds of misjudgment has resulted in the loss of one life.

They're still human beings their decisions can be still flawed by emotions and egos thus they can still make stupid things.

[redsn0w]

So they are trained, but in this case there wasn't necessary to shot a man (in the back). He could shoot on the leg, and conclude the story with a simple arrest but all we know that the us police are thinking "I'm a hero".

Unfortunate incident. The cop had decades of experience in the police force with him. But a few seconds of misjudgment has resulted in the loss of one life.

Than "the emotion" shouldn't involve when you are at the work, and the policemen work is very important in the community. The worth of a life is priceless.

So they are trained, but in this case there wasn't necessary to shot a man (in the back). He could shoot on the leg, and conclude the story with a simple arrest but all we know that the us police are thinking "I'm a hero".

How about he could have just ran behind him for 2 minutes and kicked him to the ground? Like in those 70's movies? Or is that not done these days?

The arrestant was 50 years old, the cop was in his 30's. Not much of a competition...

Exactly, where is the emotion, the "action".... it was better to chase him instead "kill" him, isn't it?