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!
But all of that is not the point, this started with the claim that Scott would have been shot even if he didn't run away, there is zero, zilch, nada, to support that outrageous claim. There is a great deal of data to indicate that the opposite is true.
Are Slager and Woods justified if they indeed shoot Wilson on the spot in which they almost did right there? Just answer this one question please.
That's not an answer. That's what people say when they don't have a link and were talking out of their ass.
I don't know "what people say" .... I said it because a link was already given.
What people on here say when they don't know what they are talking about and so they don't know how to respond from an informed, intelligent position is repeatedly call for a "link" in an effort to discredit the messenger with whom they don't agree. That's the purpose of the Name-Calling isn't it? An attempt to discredit the messenger when the "Name-Caller" doesn't have any substance with which to respond.
Like a kid calling someone a LIAR when he's told there is no Santa Claus.
The bottom line is Scott fought with Slager for about 100 yards and Slager ended up with at least one dart in him from his own taser and arguably 2 based on the position of the line to the darts....someone speculated that the object on the ground by Scott as he turns to run after fighting Slager for the 100 yards is the "taser" ... it looks more like the taser holster to me .. because there is an image of the taser line being pulled taunt as distance increases between Scott and Slager as Slager is drawing his weapon.
As in several other cases ... Martin, Brown, and Garner ... the autopsy of Scott will show it and the medical examination of Slager will. In addition the "processing" of the taser, the taser holster, and the expended taser "cartridges" and darts, along with Slager's uniform and Scott's clothing will reveal additional information. As I posted before, had Scott been able to get Slager's pistol instead of the taser this thread would be different if it even had been started in the first place. Unless, of course, Scott had been "intercepted" by another officer responding to the scene, and probably the same suspects on here would be whining about "police over-reaction" in that encounter.
You seem to be asking many questions, but answering none and providing no support to your position other than your own prejudice and minimal anecdotal stories.
Admit it, you know very well that if Scott had not run, none of this would have happened. Could the police office done things differently that would have changed what happened? Absolutely!!! Said it before and I'll say it again, as I look at it now, from home, he should not have been shot. But we all know that this unfortunate event started when Scott decided to run.
Are Slager and Woods justified if they indeed shoot Wilson on the spot in which they almost did right there? Just answer this one question please.
Don't know who Woods is, I have said it many already, and I'll repeat again for the slow readers. As I look at it from the comfort of my home, Slater should not have pulled the trigger.
"justified" is a legal term and I don't know that we have enough evidence to make that decision yet. In my view there is more than enough to take this to a grand jury to decide.
That is how you answer a question.
Now, please do the same
What data (not opnion) do you have to support the claim that in this case, Scott would have been shot even if he did run from the car?
If you have it please put if forward, if not, be a man and admit that you are wrong.
Just to clear up a little misconception one might get by reading the headline of this thread: NOBODY is THE blame for anybody's death. Or anything else, for that matter.
I don't know "what people say" .... I said it because a link was already given.
What people on here say when they don't know what they are talking about and so they don't know how to respond from an informed, intelligent position is repeatedly call for a "link" in an effort to discredit the messenger with whom they don't agree. That's the purpose of the Name-Calling isn't it? An attempt to discredit the messenger when the "Name-Caller" doesn't have any substance with which to respond.
Like a kid calling someone a LIAR when he's told there is no Santa Claus.
The bottom line is Scott fought with Slager for about 100 yards and Slager ended up with at least one dart in him from his own taser and arguably 2 based on the position of the line to the darts....someone speculated that the object on the ground by Scott as he turns to run after fighting Slager for the 100 yards is the "taser" ... it looks more like the taser holster to me .. because there is an image of the taser line being pulled taunt as distance increases between Scott and Slager as Slager is drawing his weapon.
As in several other cases ... Martin, Brown, and Garner ... the autopsy of Scott will show it and the medical examination of Slager will. In addition the "processing" of the taser, the taser holster, and the expended taser "cartridges" and darts, along with Slager's uniform and Scott's clothing will reveal additional information. As I posted before, had Scott been able to get Slager's pistol instead of the taser this thread would be different if it even had been started in the first place. Unless, of course, Scott had been "intercepted" by another officer responding to the scene, and probably the same suspects on here would be whining about "police over-reaction" in that encounter.
Nope nope nope. Use a hundred more words you ignorant mother fucker. Fact is, you lied and made up a false (or atleast yet unproven) statement to support and enhance your position. Do you think your ASSinine claims would get lost in all of these posts? I won't let that happen:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover
can we leave in the part during which Scott gets control of the taser and shoots the Officer 2x's with taser darts one of which is still "wired" to the taser gun?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover
"he shot him in the back"! Speaking of "plain and simple" ...
. has anyone ever seen someone FLEEING by ....
..... running backwards FACING THE POLICE OFFICER?.
As you can see, there is no if's or maybe's in his claim. He claims to know exactly the "FACT" that Slager was shot twice with the taser. AND that he was running facing backwards (implying that WS was more interested in assaulting the officer than getting away). No "link" shoes us anything of the sort. What was this? If not unsubstantiated bullshit made up solely to support his position FOR the brutal murder of a fellow citizen? I think the better question is, why does LLCocksucker feel the need to support the murderers/LE even when every shred of evidence is proving him otherwise?
LL, you are an ignorant dipshit, and making up bullshit has been your MO in every single thread on these forums. Now, you've been caught with your pants down (once again). Man up now, and admit that you lied, or crawl away like the slithering wimp that we all know you are. You pathetic POS.
Said it before and I'll say it again, as I look at it now, from home, he should not have been shot. But we all know that this unfortunate event started when Scott decided to run.
If you sincerely believe "he should not have been shot," then he should not have been shot, running or not.
What data (not opnion) do you have to support the claim that in this case, Scott would have been shot even if he did run from the car?
Are you trying to argue if a scuffle occurred between Slager and Scott, Slager got no legal right to use "deadly force" enen if he might be compelled to do so? Now let's throw "putting his hands on the wheel" out of the window. If a scuffle indeed takes place, ANY SHIT, SHOOTING OR NO SHOOTING, could very well be the result of that scuffle, whether Slager wishes it or not. So actually you are the one who's making baseless assertions on what the cops shall or shall not do under some extreme exigencies, not me.
Any scuffle with the law enforcement officer(s) is always potentially a life or death situation. You don't need datas to prove your pov, do you?
You seem to be asking many questions, but answering none and providing no support to your position other than your own prejudice and minimal anecdotal stories.
Admit it, you know very well that if Scott had not run, none of this would have happened. Could the police office done things differently that would have changed what happened? Absolutely!!! Said it before and I'll say it again, as I look at it now, from home, he should not have been shot. But we all know that this unfortunate event started when Scott decided to run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andymarksman
If you sincerely believe "he should not have been shot," then he should not have been shot, running or not.
OK, you have established that reading comprehension is not your strong suit. That's what I said. I also said that if he did not run he would not have been shot. I never said that running alone is a reason to shot him.
Your claim was that if he hadn't run. He would have been shot. Other than your own prejudices you have provided nothing to support that.
Are you trying to argue if a scuffle occurred between Slager and Scott, Slager got no legal right to use "deadly force" enen if he might be compelled to do so?
No!!!
Where did you see me make that argument?
Quote:
Now let's throw "putting his hands on the wheel" out of the window.
Why?
If you want to argue against yourself go ahead. If you want to have a discussion with me you will have to address my points, not the ones you make up for me (they are just not good at all, like your own points)
Quote:
If a scuffle indeed takes place, ANY SHIT, SHOOTING OR NO SHOOTING, could very well be the result of that scuffle, whether Slager wishes it or not. So actually you are the one who's making baseless assertions on what the cops shall or shall not do under some extreme exigencies, not me.
Why would a scuffle take place if Scott stays in the Car?
Are you creating a new hypothetical? If so, please provide the reason for the scuffle.
Quote:
Any scuffle with the law enforcement officer(s) is always potentially a life or death situation. You don't need datas to prove your pov, do you?
Yes, that is why it is a good idea to avoid a scuffle with LE, or anyone else for that matter.
It is also the case, that the great majority of scuffles, even with LE, do NOT end up with someone being shot. So even if there is a scuffle, for any reason what so ever, my original statement that in all llikelihood, Scott would not have been shot if he hadn't run is 100% correct!!!
On the other hand, your outrageous claim that Scott would have been shot if he hadn't run is baseless and supported only by your own prejudices.
