Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
test
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 650
MoneyManMatt 490
Jon Bon 406
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
Starscream66 285
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
George Spelvin 273
sharkman29 256
Top Posters
DallasRain70868
biomed164180
Yssup Rider61760
gman4453559
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48943
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino43221
The_Waco_Kid37740
CryptKicker37276
Mokoa36497
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-12-2015, 02:17 AM   #46
andymarksman
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 11, 2014
Location: dallas
Posts: 1,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackie S View Post

This all started when Walter Scott decided to run.

All because Walter Scott, by his fleeing, put an Officer in a terrible position where he made a horrible decision.

And in doing so, escalates the situation to the extent that results in the needless death of a man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh View Post
Who is to blame for Walter Scott's death? The cop. Just for clarity, the cop is to blame. He was too fucking lazy to do his job and pursue a suspect on foot while radioing for back up. End of story.

He was also monumentally stupid for trying to run. But now, because Officer Friendly was too lazy to chase down an over the hill fat man,
Quote:
Originally Posted by i'va biggen View Post
It is Scott's fault because he ran, and it is Slager's fault for shooting him in the back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaliLama View Post

RIP Mr. Scott.....you shouldn't have ran. You also fucked up.
So Slager wouldn't have shot him if he (Scott) didn't run?
andymarksman is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 02:45 AM   #47
bigcockpussylicker
BANNED
 
bigcockpussylicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1, 2014
Location: Van down by the river
Posts: 1,719
Encounters: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackie S View Post
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2...-scott-running

Why would a man who has been stopped on a routine traffic violation suddenly run from the scene. What did he fear so much that would compell hi, to take such an action.

Read the link. It's not that long, and gives a good insight into the mentality of men who have a justified fear of any contact with a law enforcement officer.

You might not agree with it, but these arcane laws have resulted in the death of a man, and the ruination of the life of a Police Officer.
a better question is WHY DID the cop shoot him?
did the cop know he was a felon?
It seems that there was no reason to shoot him, why did the cop shoot him?
bigcockpussylicker is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 05:11 AM   #48
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcockpussylicker View Post
a better question is WHY DID the cop shoot him?
did the cop know he was a felon?
It seems that there was no reason to shoot him, why did the cop shoot him?
Apparently the officer used his tazer on him, and the tazer didn't work. Assault on a peace officer in most states is a felony, and it is obvious after the guy ran, the officer caught up to him and some sort of physical altercation occurred.

I'm not "justifying" the shooting for this reason: Options: The officer has the vehicle and the driver's license of the guy. What ever his warrant was based upon he then would have at least two or more charges for warrants (the traffic offense for which he was stopped, no insurance, possibly possession of stolen vehicle, fleeing, resisting arrest, and/or assault on a peace officer). Apparently the guy was local or from the general area (I am not clear on that). The officer submits his paper work, files his complaints, follows up on the warrants being issued, and confirms the warrants get in the system, along with his the existing warrant. The vehicle is impounded with a "evidence hold" on it, not to be released without the officer's approval, a supervisor, and/or court order (most evidence must be released with a court order signed by a judge to protect the agency).

Hopefully the kid who took the damning video would also provide the video in which the officer disengaged the confrontation and did not shoot the suspect to document the officer was assaulted and the suspect resisted and fled again.

A problem with all this "second guessing" is "we" are sitting in here DAYS LATER .. what ... A WEEK ... ALMOST 11,000 minutes or about 600,000 seconds later ... analyzing and discussing what the officer did and did not do, should and should not have done, in the comfort of the location in front of our computers after viewing at least 2 different videos .... and passing judgment on an event in which "we" were not present, and with which most (if not all) have had no experience in dealing, for which another HUMAN BEING had 1-2 seconds to make a decision.

What's that old saying about Indians and moccasins?

And there is another one ....

..... for all you gun toting, cowboy, swaggering CHL holders:

"There goes I but for the grace of God." .. And speaking of God ..

"Matthew 7:1-3 King James Version

"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 06:36 AM   #49
dirty dog
Valued Poster
 
dirty dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 5, 2010
Location: Chicago/KC/Tampa/St. Croix
Posts: 4,493
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Apparently the officer used his tazer on him, and the tazer didn't work. Assault on a peace officer in most states is a felony, and it is obvious after the guy ran, the officer caught up to him and some sort of physical altercation occurred.

I'm not "justifying" the shooting for this reason: Options: The officer has the vehicle and the driver's license of the guy. What ever his warrant was based upon he then would have at least two or more charges for warrants (the traffic offense for which he was stopped, no insurance, possibly possession of stolen vehicle, fleeing, resisting arrest, and/or assault on a peace officer). Apparently the guy was local or from the general area (I am not clear on that). The officer submits his paper work, files his complaints, follows up on the warrants being issued, and confirms the warrants get in the system, along with his the existing warrant. The vehicle is impounded with a "evidence hold" on it, not to be released without the officer's approval, a supervisor, and/or court order (most evidence must be released with a court order signed by a judge to protect the agency).

Hopefully the kid who took the damning video would also provide the video in which the officer disengaged the confrontation and did not shoot the suspect to document the officer was assaulted and the suspect resisted and fled again.

A problem with all this "second guessing" is "we" are sitting in here DAYS LATER .. what ... A WEEK ... ALMOST 11,000 minutes or about 600,000 seconds later ... analyzing and discussing what the officer did and did not do, should and should not have done, in the comfort of the location in front of our computers after viewing at least 2 different videos .... and passing judgment on an event in which "we" were not present, and with which most (if not all) have had no experience in dealing, for which another HUMAN BEING had 1-2 seconds to make a decision.

What's that old saying about Indians and moccasins?

And there is another one ....

..... for all you gun toting, cowboy, swaggering CHL holders:

"There goes I but for the grace of God." .. And speaking of God ..

"Matthew 7:1-3 King James Version

"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
Maybe this could be the case but for one important fact. The guy was running away from him, there is no justification for this shooting other than years of the Police getting away with this kind of crap.
dirty dog is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 06:52 AM   #50
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dirty dog View Post
Maybe this could be the case but for one important fact. The guy was running away from him, there is no justification for this shooting other than years of the Police getting away with this kind of crap.
Excuse me: Did you miss?

"I'm not "justifying" the shooting for this reason:" .....


And as for this:

".....other than years of the Police getting away with this kind of crap."

This officer was charged with murder.

Please provide me with stats supporting your accusation and the source:

"....Police getting away with this kind of crap."

The "crap" being, I take it, shooting an innocent man running away in the back.

That does sound like a Sharpton or Holder comment.

Now I have recently seen some news reports about "the Police" getting ambushed! Those officers WERE innocent.

Also, as I recently disclosed the SCOTUS doesn't have a problem with "seizing" an escaping/fleeing felon under some circumstances ... and as God created us "fleeing" is not very effective when running backwards facing the officer.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 08:33 AM   #51
JD Barleycorn
Valued Poster
 
JD Barleycorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 12, 2011
Location: Olathe
Posts: 16,815
Encounters: 54
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Apparently the officer used his tazer on him, and the tazer didn't work. Assault on a peace officer in most states is a felony, and it is obvious after the guy ran, the officer caught up to him and some sort of physical altercation occurred.

I'm not "justifying" the shooting for this reason: Options: The officer has the vehicle and the driver's license of the guy. What ever his warrant was based upon he then would have at least two or more charges for warrants (the traffic offense for which he was stopped, no insurance, possibly possession of stolen vehicle, fleeing, resisting arrest, and/or assault on a peace officer). Apparently the guy was local or from the general area (I am not clear on that). The officer submits his paper work, files his complaints, follows up on the warrants being issued, and confirms the warrants get in the system, along with his the existing warrant. The vehicle is impounded with a "evidence hold" on it, not to be released without the officer's approval, a supervisor, and/or court order (most evidence must be released with a court order signed by a judge to protect the agency).

Hopefully the kid who took the damning video would also provide the video in which the officer disengaged the confrontation and did not shoot the suspect to document the officer was assaulted and the suspect resisted and fled again.

A problem with all this "second guessing" is "we" are sitting in here DAYS LATER .. what ... A WEEK ... ALMOST 11,000 minutes or about 600,000 seconds later ... analyzing and discussing what the officer did and did not do, should and should not have done, in the comfort of the location in front of our computers after viewing at least 2 different videos .... and passing judgment on an event in which "we" were not present, and with which most (if not all) have had no experience in dealing, for which another HUMAN BEING had 1-2 seconds to make a decision.

What's that old saying about Indians and moccasins?

And there is another one ....

..... for all you gun toting, cowboy, swaggering CHL holders:

"There goes I but for the grace of God." .. And speaking of God ..

"Matthew 7:1-3 King James Version

"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
On that last part, apples and oranges. A CCL does not have an obligation to enforce the law. They are just supposed to be about self defense. If someone attacks you, you draw your weapon and they run away, then you have done your job.
JD Barleycorn is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 09:36 AM   #52
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn View Post
On that last part, apples and oranges. A CCL does not have an obligation to enforce the law. They are just supposed to be about self defense. If someone attacks you, you draw your weapon and they run away, then you have done your job.
Either you were daydreaming in class, you had to take an R&R break, or your instructor accidentally turned some extra pages or skipped some overheads.

You missed that part about ....

..... "defense of other persons" ... and/or "citizen arrests"!

Scenario ... according to JD:

JD is strolling in the mall with his GF while he is "carrying" and some asshole walks up, knocks your GF down with a sucker punch, pulls out a knife, sticks it to her throat, threatens to slice her throat if she resists, tears off her hot shorts she wore for you, and fucks her right there in the mall in front of you.

JD "says" to himself: "I can't do shit! .....I have a CCL and A WEAPON .. BUT..

"A CCL does not have an obligation to enforce the law. They are just supposed to be about self defense."

So JD calls 911 and asks for an officer to come quick because someone is fucking his GF without permission in the mall at knife point.

This part of your "training" is "over the top".....

"If someone attacks you, you draw your weapon and they run away, then you have done your job."

... "attacks you" with what? ..... a paper range target rolled up?

On the "obligation" to "enforce the law" opinion, I would have to research SC law, which I doubt is a lot difference from Texas, because I believe SC is a "Model Penal Code" state, but generally speaking officers have A LOT of DISCRETION in "enforcing the law" in most states with EXTREMELY LIMITED MANDATORY arrest titles (offenses).

Back to the OP ... this officer had DISCRETION in everything he did. Meaning he had choices besides taking this person into custody, unless departmental policy dictates otherwise ... but departmental policy does not trump state law. If he violated policy by complying with state law, then he might lose his job or get days off, but he wouldn't violate "the law."
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 09:41 AM   #53
TheDaliLama
BANNED
 
TheDaliLama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 6, 2010
Location: Ikoyi Club 1938
Posts: 7,139
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timpage View Post
According to the OP, there is.....black men don't pay child support. So, they run from cops and when the cop makes a monumentally bad judgment call and shoots the black man to death.....it's the black man's fault for ruining the white cop's life.
That's not evidence..
TheDaliLama is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 09:44 AM   #54
TheDaliLama
BANNED
 
TheDaliLama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 6, 2010
Location: Ikoyi Club 1938
Posts: 7,139
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom42 View Post
Rocket Science/Brain Surgery baby aside

You are both right and this is truly as simple as that. Both of them are at fault to some degree, one has paid for it and the other will pay (already started paying). Either could have prevented it, but neither did
You must be a rocket surgeon!
TheDaliLama is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 09:47 AM   #55
Yssup Rider
Valued Poster
 
Yssup Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 61,760
Encounters: 67
Default

I understand it's was a "throw down" taser.

This was another case of a cop "enforcing the law" by turning a person into Swiss cheese.

Judge Dredd.
Yssup Rider is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 09:55 AM   #56
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider View Post
I understand it's was a "throw down" taser.
It is if it doesn't work. I understand it didn't function properly.

If it had .... the deadbeat father might have been lightly roasted cheese, ...

................ but not Swiss.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 09:58 AM   #57
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaliLama View Post
That's not evidence..
It is according to the Constitutional Law Professor in Chief in the "White" House,

and his advisers, Sharpton and Holder.... and their loyal supporters.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 10:01 AM   #58
i'va biggen
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2011
Location: kansas
Posts: 28,773
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
It is if it doesn't work. I understand it didn't function properly.

If it had .... the deadbeat father might have been lightly roasted cheese, ...

................ but not Swiss.
What is your take on the video where he goes back picks something up and drops it near the body before the other officers arrives? Tazer?
i'va biggen is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 10:05 AM   #59
Jackie S
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 31, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 15,054
Encounters: 15
Default

A lot of pundits are now wondering what charges will be brought against that 2d cop who arrived on the scene after the shooting.

Falsifying a police report? Obstruction of justice? Aiding and abetting in the commision of a felony?

As Ricky Richardo said,........"you got some 'splaining to do".
Jackie S is offline   Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 10:13 AM   #60
i'va biggen
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2011
Location: kansas
Posts: 28,773
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Either you were daydreaming in class, you had to take an R&R break, or your instructor accidentally turned some extra pages or skipped some overheads.

You missed that part about ....

..... "defense of other persons" ... and/or "citizen arrests"!

Scenario ... according to JD:

JD is strolling in the mall with his GF while he is "carrying" and some asshole walks up, knocks your GF down with a sucker punch, pulls out a knife, sticks it to her throat, threatens to slice her throat if she resists, tears off her hot shorts she wore for you, and fucks her right there in the mall in front of you.

JD "says" to himself: "I can't do shit! .....I have a CCL and A WEAPON .. BUT..

"A CCL does not have an obligation to enforce the law. They are just supposed to be about self defense."

So JD calls 911 and asks for an officer to come quick because someone is fucking his GF without permission in the mall at knife point.

This part of your "training" is "over the top".....

"If someone attacks you, you draw your weapon and they run away, then you have done your job."

... "attacks you" with what? ..... a paper range target rolled up?

On the "obligation" to "enforce the law" opinion, I would have to research SC law, which I doubt is a lot difference from Texas, because I believe SC is a "Model Penal Code" state, but generally speaking officers have A LOT of DISCRETION in "enforcing the law" in most states with EXTREMELY LIMITED MANDATORY arrest titles (offenses).

Back to the OP ... this officer had DISCRETION in everything he did. Meaning he had choices besides taking this person into custody, unless departmental policy dictates otherwise ... but departmental policy does not trump state law. If he violated policy by complying with state law, then he might lose his job or get days off, but he wouldn't violate "the law."
Who the fuck do you think you are lexie? O'Henry?
i'va biggen is offline   Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved