Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
The Alchemist Penguin
Emeritus
Joined in 2008

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby The Alchemist Penguin » Sat Feb 18, 2012 12:14 am

1cmanny1 wrote:He had a baby ffs!

He might have launched the baby at the police.
The Dan. List (Sponsored by Sears, Roebuck & Company)
1. Corazon de Leon
2. Dan.
3. Karl
4. Dan.
User avatar
satriales
Member
Joined in 2008

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby satriales » Sat Feb 18, 2012 1:05 am

1cmanny1 wrote:I don't think you guys are really putting yourselves in that situation...

He had a baby ffs!

So you'd shoot towards the baby just because you think the phone in the guys pocket might be a gun?
User avatar
1cmanny1
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
Location: New Zealand

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby 1cmanny1 » Sat Feb 18, 2012 1:43 am

No, I would let him take it back into the house and let him do god knows what to it...

If they had to lay siege to that house, it would be much more dangerous to the baby, and officers. I don't know, maybe in the UK you have a crime free paradise where nothing like this ever happens, so you can't figure out why someone would have to make a split second decision.
In the US they are trained to shoot people before they get shot themselves. They aren't going to stand around yelling for hours. And in that country I don't blame them.

Maybe a better outcome could have been achieved, who knows? But I think this one was acceptable due to the circumstances.
Image
User avatar
Lotus
Member
Joined in 2008

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Lotus » Sat Feb 18, 2012 1:49 am

Seems like very drastic action when they didn't know for sure if he had a gun or not. Surely police should be better equipped than most to ascertain whether somebody is armed or not. If they're really that unsure, why not shoot him in the leg or something, rush him, and then keep the child safe and the guy alive.

He might have a gun?
gooseberry fool! Kill him! Ask questions later, who cares if we're wrong, dammit!
Image Image
User avatar
1cmanny1
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
Location: New Zealand

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby 1cmanny1 » Sat Feb 18, 2012 1:58 am

Wounding someone who is aggressive, carrying a child and might have a gun, could be dangerous.
But it could very well have been a better option. However, in that split second , you won't have time to figure out all those options.
Plus, didn't it say he held the baby down away from his head? Might be more risky shooting his body.
Image
User avatar
Andrew Mills
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Market Harborough

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Andrew Mills » Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:53 am

And I watched Bowling for Columbine lst night on Netflix, so this doesn't surprise me in the slightest (still strawberry floated up though).

Best of luck with the US of A Alvin, might want to take advantage of their 2nd ammendment ;)
User avatar
Alvin Flummux
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Wilmington, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Alvin Flummux » Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:06 am

Andrew Mills wrote:And I watched Bowling for Columbine lst night on Netflix, so this doesn't surprise me in the slightest (still strawberry floated up though).

Best of luck with the US of A Alvin, might want to take advantage of their 2nd ammendment ;)


Eh? What now?
Image
User avatar
1>3>4>2
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Anung

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby 1>3>4>2 » Sat Feb 18, 2012 12:38 pm

The right to nail fat chicks?

America is full of them. Is that why you are going?
Ad7 wrote:GOT GUD :datass:

Check out my youtube channel where I sporadically release videos whenever I can be bothered. https://www.youtube.com/user/contardation
User avatar
Jax
Member
Joined in 2008

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Jax » Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:13 pm

You'd think that they'd have to be sure he had a weapon first before shooting. Rather than "hey, there's something in his pocket, shoot to kill!"
User avatar
TheTurnipKing
Member
Joined in 2008

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby TheTurnipKing » Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:15 pm

User avatar
Scotticus Erroticus
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Scotticus Erroticus » Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:38 pm

TheTurnipKing wrote:Makes me think of Fox News claim that Norway isn't a democracy because the police don't carry guns.


That can't be real, seriously? That is a new low for America if it is.
ImageImage
User avatar
Zerudaaaaa!
Member
Joined in 2008

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Zerudaaaaa! » Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:44 pm

Scotticus Erroticus wrote:
TheTurnipKing wrote:Makes me think of Fox News claim that Norway isn't a democracy because the police don't carry guns.


That can't be real, seriously? That is a new low for America if it is.


:| I so wish the guy pulled her up on that.
User avatar
Lagamorph
Member ♥
Joined in 2010

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Lagamorph » Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:47 pm

TheTurnipKing wrote:Makes me think of Fox News claim that Norway isn't a democracy because the police don't carry guns.

So that makes us not a democracy either then?
Lagamorph's Underwater Photography Thread
Zellery wrote:Good post Lagamorph.
Turboman wrote:Lagomorph..... Is ..... Right
User avatar
Andrew Mills
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Market Harborough

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Andrew Mills » Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:36 am

Alvin Flummux wrote:
Andrew Mills wrote:And I watched Bowling for Columbine lst night on Netflix, so this doesn't surprise me in the slightest (still strawberry floated up though).

Best of luck with the US of A Alvin, might want to take advantage of their 2nd ammendment ;)


Eh? What now?

Something that was to do with keeping a loaded gun in their house at all times was a constitutional right.
User avatar
Alvin Flummux
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Wilmington, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Alvin Flummux » Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:46 am

Andrew Mills wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Andrew Mills wrote:And I watched Bowling for Columbine lst night on Netflix, so this doesn't surprise me in the slightest (still strawberry floated up though).

Best of luck with the US of A Alvin, might want to take advantage of their 2nd ammendment ;)


Eh? What now?

Something that was to do with keeping a loaded gun in their house at all times was a constitutional right.


Ah. Well, maybe... if I'm any good at shooting it.
Image
User avatar
Somebody Else's Problem
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
Location: Wherever you want me to be, baby

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Somebody Else's Problem » Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:47 am

Alvin Flummux wrote:
Andrew Mills wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Andrew Mills wrote:And I watched Bowling for Columbine lst night on Netflix, so this doesn't surprise me in the slightest (still strawberry floated up though).

Best of luck with the US of A Alvin, might want to take advantage of their 2nd ammendment ;)


Eh? What now?

Something that was to do with keeping a loaded gun in their house at all times was a constitutional right.


Ah. Well, maybe... if I'm any good at shooting it.


It's a fairly simple point and click interface.
Image
User avatar
G-Rat
Member
Joined in 2009

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby G-Rat » Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:30 pm

The US should have nationwide rioting and looting to send a strong message to the government about how they feel.

Because, that's how it's done, right?
Anung wrote:Destroying Japan from the inside like an alcoholic Nagasaki.
User avatar
Alvin Flummux
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Wilmington, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Alvin Flummux » Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:46 pm

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Andrew Mills wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Andrew Mills wrote:And I watched Bowling for Columbine lst night on Netflix, so this doesn't surprise me in the slightest (still strawberry floated up though).

Best of luck with the US of A Alvin, might want to take advantage of their 2nd ammendment ;)


Eh? What now?

Something that was to do with keeping a loaded gun in their house at all times was a constitutional right.


Ah. Well, maybe... if I'm any good at shooting it.


It's a fairly simple point and click interface.


There's no reticule in the middle of my vision though, nor am I equipped with a Pip-Boy with VATs.
Image
User avatar
Somebody Else's Problem
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
Location: Wherever you want me to be, baby

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Somebody Else's Problem » Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:49 pm

Alvin Flummux wrote:
Somebody Else's Problem wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Andrew Mills wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Andrew Mills wrote:And I watched Bowling for Columbine lst night on Netflix, so this doesn't surprise me in the slightest (still strawberry floated up though).

Best of luck with the US of A Alvin, might want to take advantage of their 2nd ammendment ;)


Eh? What now?

Something that was to do with keeping a loaded gun in their house at all times was a constitutional right.


Ah. Well, maybe... if I'm any good at shooting it.


It's a fairly simple point and click interface.


There's no reticule in the middle of my vision though, nor am I equipped with a Pip-Boy with VATs.


It does have an Aim-down-the-sights mode though.
Image
User avatar
Alvin Flummux
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Wilmington, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: Police in US Shoot Man For Holding "Something"
Postby Alvin Flummux » Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:53 pm

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Somebody Else's Problem wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Andrew Mills wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Andrew Mills wrote:And I watched Bowling for Columbine lst night on Netflix, so this doesn't surprise me in the slightest (still strawberry floated up though).

Best of luck with the US of A Alvin, might want to take advantage of their 2nd ammendment ;)


Eh? What now?

Something that was to do with keeping a loaded gun in their house at all times was a constitutional right.


Ah. Well, maybe... if I'm any good at shooting it.


It's a fairly simple point and click interface.


There's no reticule in the middle of my vision though, nor am I equipped with a Pip-Boy with VATs.


It does have an Aim-down-the-sights mode though.


Ah... uh... yeah okay.
Image

Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bigcheez2k3, Dowbocop, glowy69, Lagamorph, PuppetBoy, Skippy, Winckle, Xeno and 24 guests