I heard “I can’t believe you’re a sick son of a bitch that would come to our political PR event to make a political stance on a political issue! “

Aren’t these the people who have made a mission out of standing up in school, town, and county board meetings and scream ranting at them, often in large numbers, often making threats, until the meetings are ended? Now the same snowflakes are outraged someone does the same to them in an effort to make a better suggestion to protect children than the Republican suggestion, which today is arm every adult and lock all the fire exits, because having armed guards worked out so well in Florida.

Edit: it now sounds like Uvaldi police waited quite some time (1:15) before entering the school, with videos of parents pleading with them to do something and dozens of armed police on scene, during which time the murderer shot down 19 children and two teachers. So much for armed security being the solution…that only works if they act, which is rare.

No, they never were taught that because that's murder. Most people don't teach their children how to act in the face of others acting outrageously wrong. Living that way, totally aquessing to any perceived authority under fear of execution, is unthinkable to most Americans.
If you run from the police and get shot in the back, they're in the wrong far more than you, even if you're armed.
Police may only legally use deadly force if their life or others are in imminent danger if they don't. A fleeing suspect doesn't come close unless they're actively pointing their gun at someone.
"Stop or I'll shoot" is not a policy, it's supposed to be an empty threat (or a line in a movie). If you're dumb enough to excuse them following through on that threat, you're part of the problem.
Fleeing arrest is not a capital crime allowing police to become judge, jury, and executioner.

When police misconduct becomes the expected behavior, everyone loses.

You mean the armed guard stationed at the school that destroys the contention that having armed guards helps, because having armed police didn't help? OK. Thanks for answering.

To be honest, until last night I didn't know he was a real deputy...not that it helped.

As the top law enforcement officer in the country, doesn't Trump lead the team, though?

The witnesses? The only witness that vaguely supports this that I've seen is an anonymous witness cited in the Daily Caller. Not credible journalism even by USA standards. The known witnesses are Dorian Johnson (altercation at the car, shooting as he ran away, he got hit, turned around put his hands up and stumbled forwards before the shooting began again), James McKnight (more or less the same as Johnson), Michael Brady (altercation at car, shooting, then as Brown was halfway towards falling to the ground more shots), Piaget Crenshaw (shots fired as he ran away with hands up, turned with hands up, more firing). Those accounts aren't too far from the Police account really. Is it reasonable to conclude deadly force is required in the timeframe of the shooting? What does police protocol say? One step? Two? When can you be sure it's not charging but belligerence, drunkenness, or injury? I'm sure America are the experts in these cases by now and have explicit and clear guidelines for semi-autonomous itinerant armed police officers and when they can and cannot open fire. Surely it isn't just 'if you harbour any fear, kill or otherwise incapacitate the citizen you are trying to apprehend'?

There is also TheePharoah who tweeted it from the scene and said ' JUST SAW SOMEONE DIE OMFG....no reason! He was running!', but you know, its not clear he can provide further useful information assuming he was interviewed.

YES!!! A thousand times YES, they absolutely should have. These aren't two random idiots with guns, they're supposed to be trained to deal with this kinda thing! It shouldn't even be a discussion, it should be an automatic response.

And again, if it didn't work, the other one could still have shot him.

That's the problem with an armed police force. When your first tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

I can't quite see the case for why this death is so outrageous. He's a big guy who it appears was physically assaulting an armed police officer. That is never going to end in a discussion and mutual agreement.

Seems like the community overreacted because colours, then the cops massively overreacted in return and demonstrated they have far too large a budget for soldier toys.

Noone is telling Israel to shrug their shoulders....the issue is not with the defence, it is the measure of the defence.

Israel should send in a police force, and find those responsible. Shut down the tunnels by ground, stop bombing indiscriminately.

This requires police action, not military...the 'missiles' you keep referring to are pathetically weak, absolutely pathetic.

Were I leader of Israel, I would drop the wall, set about repairing the damages inside the city, allow the organisation of a government, support it in getting benefits in for the people of Gaza and Palestine, halt the invasion of settlers into Palestinian territory, halt the bombings and send in armed police where reports of weapons stashes are. Set up large scale police patrols in troubled areas, let people go about their lives without the fear of having a bomb dropped on their head, try to give them a leg up in life....and the revenge attacks using piss weak rockets will stop.

The Israeli measure of force is far far higher than it should be.

There is no army inside gaza, its kids playing with homemade rocketry. Get cops in there, not 500lb bombs.

If both sides agreed to a ceasefire, allowing UN peacekeepers into the area to...you know...keep the peace, whilst the cities are rebuilt, peoples lives can get back to normal...my god imagine that world.

As I understand it after the President's speech, the government will provide incentives for schools to hire resource officers. These are armed police officers. So am I right in understanding that the suggestion by the NRA to do this, which was met with great derision two weeks ago, is now acceptable since the President recommended it yesterday?

I for one am glad that he and the NRA are in agreement on this point.

Top banner scroll on Yahoo Home Page this morning --- NRA calls for armed police officers in every school.

So to protect the ownership of large magazine clips, they want the entire country to hire a police officer to stand around doing nothing in every single school in the country.

Now there is a workable compromise.

A crowd at the Olympic torch events will be rather different to one that is being yelled at by armed police. I took part in one and the only armed police were walking around chatting to people and smiling.

I don't trust what this guy says, frankly. I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt and I don't know he's lying, but have you ever heard someone say "haha, yeah, I totally deserved that"? He was probably knowingly doing something he shouldn't have been.

Having said that, he very probably didn't deserve to get shot with a rubber bullet for what he was doing.

such a weird video but it still gets my upvote.

1. not that I really care one way or the other, but why is pigeon shooting illegal? Aren't they vermin for the most part? They aren't endangered or anything are they?

2. Kudos to the woman for standing up to the cop and the owner, but at the same time, I'm not really going to fault the cop for not being up to a lawyer's standards in the law. Their job is really to stop people from getting physically hurt. There is the issue of whether or not they were on the guy's property sure, but they are two people with cameras, there is no threat of home invasion or anything like that. Sure there is a obviously a dispute whether or not it's ok for them to be there, but they're obviously peaceable so cop intimidation clearly isn't necessary.

Just makes me wonder if there isn't some need for an unarmed subset of the police that handles disputes like this but when you clearly don't need a armed cop. Someone who does know property/civil law very well and can act to settle disputes like this and are unarmed because clearly an armed cop is a waste of resources in a situation like this but you obviously do need a third party to respond to the dispute. For example, wouldn't a police negotiator be better than actual armed police in this matter?

Cops obviously do need to know the laws they enforce, but using cops to settle disputes like this where there clearly is no threat of harm or use of force is utterly ridiculous. Maybe the cops respond to the call, but when they assess the situation and there is clearly no threat of force or harm, hand it off to an unarmed party that can settle the dispute.

I just have a hunch that neither side is completely innocent in this situation.

This is just some middle of the road, middle england mid-morning BBC presenter trying to stop unsubstantiated and potentially dangerous anti-police rhetoric going out to the country. The BBC are the most reliable mainstream news source in the UK except maybe for the Guardian but they do have a 'look after the country and include everyone' agenda. Hardly the worst problem to have with a news agency.

Darkus has been vociferously sharing his opinion with the BBC for my whole life. He's OK by me and he has a good point about black kids being pissed off with the cops, nothing new there.

But this guy Duggan *ALLEGEDLY* had a loaded 9mm in his hand when the armed police came to get him. IF that's true (and remember de Menezes before believing them) then its a very short step to getting shot from there. As an excuse for a horde of chav 14 year olds to pile out of the estates into sports shops and steal trainers and flatscreens it's off message enough to be irresponsible to broadcast.

The real problem, that the BBC will stay will clear of on the morning news, is 30 years of unregulated capitalism, training kids to build their self esteem around what they have and relying on the market to get it to them. The market isn't looking after these families any more, and that means no one is. No brains, no prospects, no jobs, no money and still a constant barrage of adverts telling them what to desire. More trouble to come..

^I was presuming that @conan was stopped for something.

Sorry to scare you, conan, if I did. @Drax is right -- most cops are cool.

And if you are dancing at a non-public forum and ignore the direct instructions of an armed police officer, yes, please do be prepared to be treated roughly.

>> ^DerHasisttot:

>> ^MaxWilder:
Every single story described somebody fleeing or resisting. I have no sympathy for them.

A human being died for running away. A HUMAN BEING DIED FOR RUNNING AWAY!


Wrong! A human being died for being stupid! Happens every damn day. He resisted arrest, fled the scene, then FOUGHT with an armed police officer!

I'm not saying he deserved to die. But when you're an idiot, and you fuck with somebody who's got a gun, then don't be surprised if that's the end for you.

You obey the officer. If you are wrongfully arrested, you file a complaint and sue later. Or you can risk a painful death. Choice is yours.

I got no sympathy for him.

>> ^Drax:
Quote-"And even the title now is numerically incorrect. It was one officer against one man--the others who came after never pulled their triggers. And though this seems nit picky, it is not. You could call it "One Premature Cop Unloads.""
What a stretch.
The title is not in-accurate. If the title read, "10 Fully Armed Police SHOOT Drug Addict" THAT would be in-accurate. I don't know if there's ten cops in the video (so there's that), but whatever the number is.. that's what the guy was up against.
The rest where trying to hand him a copy of the Watch Tower..??
..just sayin'


Well, here is a equal statement; "Ten knife fight at bar." If by ten knife fight you mean three people stabbing seven others, sure, the statement is still true-ish... I mean ten people were involved in the knife fight... But then, true-ish is a stretch too.