Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Pics and Videos Buffet
Man In Wheelchair Brandishing Knife Shot 9 Times
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="2011fiveliter" data-source="post: 16702004" data-attributes="member: 117274"><p>I think the officers use of force will be viewed justified. Even though it doesn't look good to the average person. The standard will be what would a reasonable officer do in the same situation. The jeopardy triangle would be met, opportunity, ability and intent. Subject had a deadly weapon, and with that being said. Officers are not required to use any force less than deadly at that time.</p><p></p><p>For those saying they could of tazed him. Please go watch the Jacob Blake shooting. The officers in that case, tazed Jacob twice. He walked right through the tazing. Tazers are not the end all tool here. </p><p></p><p>And just because the officer's shot suspect from behind does not mean a thing. They shot at a time, when there was people in immiment danger. Their lives might not of been in danger. But, the people who are in the store could of been in danger.</p><p></p><p>As usual, the best practice is to wait until all facts are out about the shooting. And allow all facts be given to a jury and allow them to apply the facts to the statutes.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="2011fiveliter, post: 16702004, member: 117274"] I think the officers use of force will be viewed justified. Even though it doesn't look good to the average person. The standard will be what would a reasonable officer do in the same situation. The jeopardy triangle would be met, opportunity, ability and intent. Subject had a deadly weapon, and with that being said. Officers are not required to use any force less than deadly at that time. For those saying they could of tazed him. Please go watch the Jacob Blake shooting. The officers in that case, tazed Jacob twice. He walked right through the tazing. Tazers are not the end all tool here. And just because the officer's shot suspect from behind does not mean a thing. They shot at a time, when there was people in immiment danger. Their lives might not of been in danger. But, the people who are in the store could of been in danger. As usual, the best practice is to wait until all facts are out about the shooting. And allow all facts be given to a jury and allow them to apply the facts to the statutes. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Pics and Videos Buffet
Man In Wheelchair Brandishing Knife Shot 9 Times
Top