I cant argue with your last point at all. But i dont think you can again making sweeping statements about this situation. I am simply making statements based upon the information i have been presented with. Am i 100% right ; no, but can i make assumptions that would fit the situation and use information from cop shootings before to make these assumptions.
As much as I agree with you about being soured by previous cases, assumptions have no weight when considering what actually happened here. And what happened is that dumbasses got treated like dumbasses. If anyone was trying to run me down, regardless of how much of a special snowflake they thought they were, you're damn right I'm going to unload on them. Have you ever been shot at or had your life threatened in a severe manner?
Like I said whether or not a cop was actually injured makes no difference. They don't shoot out of revenge or to get even (in an ideal world), it's to prevent injuries to anyone but the perp. In this case she actually hit the cop with the car but it doesn't matter even a little. But speaking in general, do you think cops should wait to be shot at before firing their pistol? If they are shot at but missed would that matter? If they were shot in the leg would they be justified in shooting to kill?
I have been mugged but nothing where i could 100% think my life was in danger. I think where i am trying to argue is the legitimacy of the hit and run. How was this cop able to get away with superficial wounds when she supposedly was trying to hit him ? I think we can all say that the majority of shootings are to get even and for revenge. The only time i can see the cops side is if there is someone clearly brandishing a weapon or if shots were fired and the cops are arriving on the scene. So in terms of speaking in general its impossible because its situational to when you should be able to fire. In this situation where the cop got away with superficial wounds i dont think so. If someone shot at a cop and missed then damn straight they should put them down. If they were shot in the leg i would still say they would be justified but that was not the case here. Someone said earlier in this thread that the cop most likely tried to block the girl from escaping and he was then hit. That really sounds like something a cop would do and if thats the case then i cant help but feel like the cop should have known better (if that is the case) who in the right mind is going to try and get in front of someone fleeing ? You bring up good points but they are not applicable in this situation, there were no guns to speak of , the officer gets away with minimal injuries and we have a girl shot multiple times.
I know but it will just keep going in a circle we are both very set in our minds which is not a problem in fact i think its a good thing that we can combat our points
I agree she shouldn't have been shot, I just don't agree with your thinking that since the cops injuries weren't severe he shouldn't have shot her. His injuries has nothing to do with it, or if she even hit him. He should have stepped out of the way and shot the car engine or radiator. But that's only my guess since as you say, we weren't there and it's situational.
Possibly. I'm not really set in any mindset when dealing with cops. I have a very strong dislike for most of them. Nonetheless, stay baked man and enjoy life
I think where im trying to get at is that from what we are hearing and what is being said i have my convictions on if she was really trying to hit him or if she was just trying to get away and he got in the way. That would change the situation from where she had no intention of really hitting him instead of it being an active move she made. If she had zero intention to hit him and he got in the way of the car how can he justify a clean shooting ?
Because he was in the way.. in the end, it doesn't really matter if she was trying to run him over or if she was just trying to get away and he stood in the path. The car was stolen, so obviously someone in the car is a criminal.. seeing as they committed a crime and all, and it's supposed to be the duty of police to catch criminals. If I were to guess.. I'd say he stood in front of the car and she had 4 other peers in the car yelling for her to go go go go. A young girl in a panicked state with her peers egging her on would be more than enough to pressure her into putting pressure on the gas peddle. If that's what really happened, I don't know.. but I have a feeling that at least one her passengers were more involved with how it all unraveled. Plus, if this was some sort of malicious attack.. with a Honda Civic packed with 5 people and multiple shots fired, you'd think someone else would of been hit too. Sounds like it was more of a 'by the book' event.. which raises the issue of should the "book" be changed? Should a cop not stand in the way of a criminal (at least one of the five kids were one) who is trying to get away and potentially commit more crimes.. possibly even hurt someone else? Or should a cop try to use his whole being to stop criminals? Even if the cop got in the way, they obviously didn't care about hurting someone while committing a crime.. and you can't stop a car with a taser or baton. Just a shitty situation created by our shitty society and not so much our shitty police force..