The Tamir Rice Shooting.......no indictment

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

I thought you were the expert? What with your "ambush" military training!

Or are you just holding on to Deputy Chief Nobles?

So you think all academies are "taxpayer funded police academies"?

And you also "think" police academies teach "military tactics" to cadets?

Keep cutting and pasting!

Your whole argument hinges on how the officers' use of a pane of glass as a shield between themselves and a potentially armed assailant less than 10 ft distant is a bona fide and "correct" police tactic, you supercilious jackass, and YOU HAVE YET to cite a solitary legitimate source to back up your assumption, you supercilious jackass.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Your whole argument hinges on how the officers' use of a pane of glass as a shield between themselves and a potentially armed assailant less than 10 ft distant is a bona fide and "correct" police tactic, .....

And you CANNOT find one post in which I made that statement ...!!!

... all you got is big letters and name calling with irrelevant "cutting and pasting"!

Your "whole argument" is based on you believing you know what was in the officers' minds when they arrived ..... you have already had to change your "speculation" twice to fit your bullshit ... you want me to show you some more of your bullshit ..... speculation ..... or would you like to quit while you are behind ..... just a few major points????

You are mouthing off ... you don't know what the fuck you're talking about!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

And you CANNOT find one post in which I made that statement ...!!!

... all you got is big letters and name calling with irrelevant "cutting and pasting"!

Your "whole argument" is based on you believing you know what was in the officers' minds when they arrived ..... you have already had to change your "speculation" twice to fit your bullshit ... you want me to show you some more of your bullshit ..... speculation ..... or would you like to quit while you are behind ..... just a few major points????

You are mouthing off ... you don't know what the fuck you're talking about!

Your argument that the officers behaved in a tactically correct manner and your out of hand dismissal of Noble's criticisms means your whole argument IS that the officers' use of a pane of glass as a shield between themselves and a potentially armed assailant less than 10 ft distant is a bona fide and "correct" police tactic, you supercilious jackass.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

...the video, you'll see that the cops responding to the call put their lives at risk by charging onto the scene.

... but I do not understand why ....

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

...from the video that the officers raced onto the scene ....

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Point conceded. The 28.4 ft skid marks do indicate .....

Originally Posted by LexusLover

I thought you were the expert?


Keep cutting and pasting!

Your "assumption" .... "charging" and "raced onto the scene" .....

.. but left only "28.4 feet of skid marks ON GRASS!!!!

In all of your accident reconstruction training while learning how to be a "squad leader" that avoids an "ambush" ..... which you were unable to "avoid' BTW .... did you learn the dynamics of "drag factors (aka coefficients of friction) and the determination of the speed of the vehicle .... about a .2 for grass (wet or dry is about the same so that's not much of a consideration) which means that the vehicle may have been doing 10 mph when the brakes were applied ... AND if the ground was soft (from being wet) the locked tires push mud in front of them (causing a rut) that increases the drag and reduces the speed.

.. that may be "racing" or "charging" on your tricycle, but not in a patrol unit!

Mr. Squad Leader!

Now go find the "glass" comment you claim I made, which you are LYING ABOUT!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Your "assumption" .... "charging" and "raced onto the scene" .....

.. but left only "28.4 feet of skid marks ON GRASS!!!!

In all of your accident reconstruction training while learning how to be a "squad leader" that avoids an "ambush" ..... which you were unable to "avoid' BTW .... did you learn the dynamics of "drag factors (aka coefficients of friction) and the determination of the speed of the vehicle .... about a .2 for grass (wet or dry is about the same so that's not much of a consideration) which means that the vehicle may have been doing 10 mph when the brakes were applied ...

.. that may be "racing" or "charging" on your tricycle, but not in a patrol unit!

Now go find the "glass" comment you are LYING ABOUT!

The video shows, in fact, that there was only a pane of glass shielding the officers from a potentially armed assailant less than 10 ft distant, you supercilious jackass. Hence, your argument that the officers behaved in a tactically correct manner and your out of hand dismissal of Noble's criticisms means your whole argument IS that the officers' use of a pane of glass as a shield between themselves and a potentially armed assailant less than 10 ft distant is a bona fide and "correct" police tactic, you supercilious jackass.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

And you CANNOT find one post in which I made that statement .. ABOUT HIDING BEHIND "GLASS".!!!

You are mouthing off ... you don't know what the fuck you're talking about!

Where did I post about the officers ....

"use of a pane of glass as a shield between themselves and a potentially armed assailant ......."?

Or save yourself some time and embarrassment AGAIN, ...

.. and admit I didn't post such a thing!

Otherwise you're proving MY POINT and that is the only way you can appear to prevail in a conversation is fabricate what others have said and then attempt to refute the dumbass fabrication YOU CREATED!


YOU ARE THE ONE CRITICIZING WHAT THEY DID OR DIDN'T DO, NOT ME!

.. and all you can do is pull up a quote from a "Deputy Chief" ... who wasn't there either and ALSO ASSUMES HE KNOWS WHAT WAS IN THE MINDS OF THE OFFICERS WHEN THEY ARRIVED IN THE AREA .......

... now you have "potentially armed" ... you're getting worse, not better!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Where did I post about the officers ....

"use of a pane of glass as a shield between themselves and a potentially armed assailant ......."?

Or save yourself some time and embarrassment AGAIN, ...

.. and admit I didn't post such a thing!

Otherwise you're proving MY POINT and that is the only way you can appear to prevail in a conversation is fabricate what others have said and then attempt to refute the dumbass fabrication YOU CREATED!

YOU ARE THE ONE CRITICIZING WHAT THEY DID OR DIDN'T DO, NOT ME!

.. and all you can do is pull up a quote from a "Deputy Chief" ... who wasn't there either and ALSO ASSUMES HE KNOWS WHAT WAS IN THE MINDS OF THE OFFICERS WHEN THEY ARRIVED IN THE AREA .......

... now you have "potentially armed" ... you're getting worse, not better!

Your idiotic argument defending what the officers did is positing that they behaved in a tactically correct manner, you supercilious jackass, and your out of hand dismissal of Noble's criticisms de facto means your whole argument IS that the officers' use of a pane of glass as a shield between themselves and a potentially armed assailant less than 10 ft distant is a bona fide and "correct" police tactic, you supercilious jackass.

[whatupwiththat]

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Your idiotic argument defending what the officers did is positing that they behaved in a tactically correct manner, you supercilious jackass, and your out of hand dismissal of Noble's criticisms de facto means your whole argument IS that the officers' use of a pane of glass as a shield between themselves and a potentially armed assailant less than 10 ft distant is a bona fide and "correct" police tactic, you supercilious jackass.

Where did I post ....

"what the officers did is positing that they behaved in a tactically correct manner..."?

Still making up shit ..... you don't create "straw men" ....

... you create "shit men"!!!!

You are rapidly approaching WTF status for fabricating what people post!!!!

You conveniently forget you are the one criticizing what you "believe" that did and did not do.... and you (and Nobles) base your criticism on what you two fools think you "know" about what was going on in their minds!!!! He's a flaming liberal ..... are you now?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Where did I post ....

"what the officers did is positing that they behaved in a tactically correct manner..."?Still making up shit ..... you don't create "straw men" ....

... you create "shit men"!!!!

You are rapidly approaching WTF status for fabricating what people post!!!!

Your every post in this thread has been an argument defending what the officers did, i.e., they behaved in a tactically correct manner, you supercilious jackass. Add to that your out of hand dismissal of Noble's criticisms de facto means your whole argument IS that the officers' use of a pane of glass as a shield between themselves and a potentially armed assailant less than 10 ft distant is a bona fide and "correct" police tactic, you supercilious jackass.

[LexusLover]

You sound like a spoiled little brat at the grocery store check out counter ...

.. who wants a fucking candy bar!

Repeat the same fabricated shit .. enough times and someone will actually believe it or get tired of seeing it!!!!

Quit putting words in my posts ... that are not there!!! Next thing you'll be pulling another WTF and start telling what I really meant and what I believe.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Full of assumptions ....

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You sound like a spoiled little brat at the grocery store check out counter ...

.. who wants a fucking candy bar!

Repeat the same fabricated shit .. enough times and someone will actually believe it or get tired of seeing it!!!!

Quit putting words in my posts ... that are not there!!! Next thing you'll be pulling another WTF and start telling what I really meant and what I believe.

That's what I've been saying all along ... and you won't admit it!

I'll rephrase it!....

.....You are full of shit!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You sound like a spoiled little brat at the grocery store check out counter ...

.. who wants a fucking candy bar!

Repeat the same fabricated shit .. enough times and someone will actually believe it or get tired of seeing it!!!!

Quit putting words in my posts ... that are not there!!! Next thing you'll be pulling another WTF and start telling what I really meant and what I believe.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

That's what I've been saying all along ... and you won't admit it!

I'll rephrase it!....

.....You are full of shit!

Well, you supercilious jackass, those two posts of yours were nothing more than you deflecting from reality and steering a tangent into the ridiculous!

Heretofore, your every post in this thread has been an argument defending what the officers did, i.e., they behaved in a tactically correct manner, you supercilious jackass. Add to that your out of hand dismissal of Noble's criticisms de facto means your whole argument IS that the officers' use of a pane of glass as a shield between themselves and a potentially armed assailant less than 10 ft distant is a bona fide and "correct" police tactic, you supercilious jackass.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

You better be careful IB of you'll end up on the redneck hillbilly's dreaded "ignore" list, which he himself ignores.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

One thing I will not allow you to avoid ... you are the one criticizing the actions taken by the police, not me. You have the burden to prove their actions were unreasonable. You have not done that ......

.. you should probably go back to revisit your original premise .. .based on ASSUMPTIONS!

Keep whining and fabricating. btw: How's the squad leader doing in training?

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You don't like the answers because they don't 'fit" with your conclusions!!!!

You have the audacity to criticize someone with 20-20 hindsight after months of being able to examine the information when the target of your criticism by your own admission had only ONE SECOND to make the decision......when the person forcing the decision was the one holding the firearm and approaching the police!!!!

You are a fool!

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Your assumptions AND the metamorphosis of your "enlightenment"!!!

That's the difference between armchair computer internet hacks like you and those public servants who must put their lives on the line daily in the face of dumbass no-nothing criticism like yours! ... Even with your "Army trained squad leader" training experience!!!!!

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Like I said .... LE officers are tasked with the responsibility of responding to dangerous, violent situations in an attempt to thwart or neutralize the threat without much "reflection for the consequences of their behavior" .....

.. the pundits and all those folks who weren't there can do that!

That's the main reason I try to avoid "pre-judging" them or "post-judging" them in circumstances in which they have just a second or two, if that long, to ... conduct as you said "a proper scene analysis" ... and respond to either save their own lives or someone else's life. Unless you've had to do that then I would suggest it's best not to pass judgment .... as the saying goes about walking in someone else's moccasins. And if you have in fact done so, then you ought to know the realities of such a situation yourself.

IBHindered .... I've tried to make it easy for you. The theme ..... I'll repeat:

Unless you've had to do that then I would suggest it's best not to pass judgment .... as the saying goes about walking in someone else's moccasins. And if you have in fact done so, then you ought to know the realities of such a situation yourself.

Now you've gotten Speedo all in a stir!