I think the officer who shot her should be made to give a statement (change the law). As mentioned, while dangerous, shooting from vehicles is more common than you think, and here in the UK, often when armed police stop a vehicle, some won't get out but they'll point rifles out of the window at the suspect. Wouldn't want to do it with something like a G36, but a 5.56mm weapon that is accurate, then yes.

 

I hope the officer faces charges.

Islamic Somali' affirmative action hire goofs up big time, color me suprised. Lmao, hopefully the officer goes down. All of the rest of their shootings have been golden, Castile' and all.

Edited July 23, 20178 yr by LCPDDevin91

On 7/22/2017 at 3:05 PM, TheDivineHustle said:

hom·i·cide

[ˈhäməˌsīd]

NOUN

1.  

   the deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another; murder:

    

   The deliberate and unlawful killing, not just killing someone. Unless the dictionary definition is wrong and needs to be updated.

    

   I am in no way questioning your intelligence. It's just that I can't stand to believe something when evidence is literally pointing elsewhere. If you tell me to go left and everything else under the sun is telling me to go right, I'm going to go right.

I'm sorry, but your definition is wrong. Here's Cornell University's definition:

 

 

homicide

n. the killing of a human being due to the act or omission of another. Included among homicides are murder and manslaughter, but not all homicides are a crime, particularly when there is a lack of criminal intent. Non-criminal homicides include killing in self-defense, a misadventure like a hunting accident or automobile wreck without a violation of law like reckless driving, or legal (government) execution. Suicide is a homicide, but in most cases there is no one to prosecute if the suicide is successful. Assisting or attempting suicide can be a crime.

 

9 hours ago, qwertyK said:

As mentioned, while dangerous, shooting from vehicles is more common than you think, and here in the UK, often when armed police stop a vehicle, some won't get out but they'll point rifles out of the window at the suspect. Wouldn't want to do it with something like a G36, but a 5.56mm weapon that is accurate, then yes.

It's only dangerous in the fact that your hearing will negatively be impacted, you might get a burn or two from brass, but that's about it. Take a look at my previous post where the trooper fires 60 rounds out of an M4 (yes, M4 not AR15) while pursuing a suspect.

 

On 7/22/2017 at 4:26 PM, Hystery said:

The simplest and most direct definition of a homicide is just that. A human killing another. After that point, that's just semantics. He's talking about the homicide in the broad meaning of the term, while you're talking about the more legal approach of the homicide. Both are correct.

Actually, as you see above with the definition from Cornell University (a famous and renowned law school here in the states), my definition is much closer to the legal one.

3 hours ago, crkinnh said:

I'm sorry, but your definition is wrong. Here's Cornell University's definition:

 

 

homicide

n. the killing of a human being due to the act or omission of another. Included among homicides are murder and manslaughter, but not all homicides are a crime, particularly when there is a lack of criminal intent. Non-criminal homicides include killing in self-defense, a misadventure like a hunting accident or automobile wreck without a violation of law like reckless driving, or legal (government) execution. Suicide is a homicide, but in most cases there is no one to prosecute if the suicide is successful. Assisting or attempting suicide can be a crime.

 

It's only dangerous in the fact that your hearing will negatively be impacted, you might get a burn or two from brass, but that's about it. Take a look at my previous post where the trooper fires 60 rounds out of an M4 (yes, M4 not AR15) while pursuing a suspect.

 

Actually, as you see above with the definition from Cornell University (a famous and renowned law school here in the states), my definition is much closer to the legal one.

I'd say it's more a matter of semantics and additionally a matter of perspective, adding onto what @Hystery stated earlier.

 

(I quoted you because I find it to be proper etiquette for someone to be aware that you're addressing them or something they've said)

I wonder if that word on the street that Noor was hired due to affirmative action and not due to his qualifications has any point. at this time all I can say is that people who get the job due to being related to someone, calling in a favor, corruption or some other way rather than due to merit, seldom make good professionals in any area (let alone a job where you're trusted with a gun and immense authority).

"i feared for my life"

40 minutes ago, J T said:

"i feared for my life"

 

That is what's truly laughable.  You weren't responding to an armed shooter call, or a call that sounded like an ambush.  It was a possible rape, and I can only imagine dispatch reported "THE WITNESS/CALLER IS ON SCENE AND WAITING FOR YOU." 

They are now saying a woman "slapped the patrol car"? So are they basically trying to say a woman, just slapped the trunk of a police car for no apparent reason. 

1 minute ago, qwertyK said:

They are now saying a woman "slapped the patrol car"? So are they basically trying to say a woman, just slapped the trunk of a police car for no apparent reason. 

 

Even if she had slapped the car, since when does slapping an inanimate object warrant being shot point blank?  Funny how now they are perfectly okay with saying a woman slapping their car scared them enough to shoot her.

Just now, Kallus Rourke said:

 

Even if she had slapped the car, since when does slapping an inanimate object warrant being shot point blank?  Funny how now they are perfectly okay with saying a woman slapping their car scared them enough to shoot her.

I can somehow potentially understand that it may have been mistaken for a gunshot, but I think its just a lousy excuse. I will be interested to find out if the officer has to go to court.

What baffles me even more, is that the officer who shot the woman down "refused to be interrogated by investigators" and is "on a paid leave".

 

Like, what the fuck? If it was a random person who did that, he'd have his ass sat down on the bench of a cell already, without being paid for it. So just because he's a cop, he can just refuse to be interrogated and stay at home, still being paid? He killed a person for eff sake, that's one of the reasons why people lose trust in the police. When one officer does something bad, he's never treated like he has done something bad.

4 minutes ago, Hystery said:

What baffles me even more, is that the officer who shot the woman down "refused to be interrogated by investigators" and is "on a paid leave".

 

Like, what the fuck? If it was a random person who did that, he'd have his ass sat down on the bench of a cell already, without being paid for it. So just because he's a cop, he can just refuse to be interrogated and stay at home, still being paid? He killed a person for eff sake, that's one of the reasons why people lose trust in the police. When one officer does something bad, he's never treated like he has done something bad.

 

I'm one of those people who tries hard to not turn against police, and regularly will say "not all cops are bad guys" - which is true, but then you see more and more cases like this or that are similar, and it's just..."fuck this, why do I try?"

27 minutes ago, Kallus Rourke said:

 

I'm one of those people who tries hard to not turn against police, and regularly will say "not all cops are bad guys" - which is true, but then you see more and more cases like this or that are similar, and it's just..."fuck this, why do I try?"

I don't find it the least bit challenging to trust in the police. Of course, there are a few bad apples in every organization and that's worldwide. According to statistics, American police have actually reached record approval ratings. It appears that as more cases of alleged police brutality arise, the popularity of law enforcement increases.

 

Spoiler

http://www.gallup.com/poll/213869/confidence-police-back-historical-average.aspx?g_source=Police&g_medium=search&g_campaign=tiles

https://sputniknews.com/us/201707111055434169-us-police-confidendence-poll/

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/07/11/Poll-Confidence-in-police-increases-to-historical-average/7941499788035/

 

 

Edited July 26, 20178 yr by TheDivineHustle

Just now, TheDivineHustle said:

I don't find it the least bit challenging to trust in the police. Of course, there are a few bad apples in every organization and that's worldwide. According to statistics, American police have actually reached record approval ratings.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

http://www.gallup.com/poll/213869/confidence-police-back-historical-average.aspx?g_source=Police&g_medium=search&g_campaign=tiles

https://sputniknews.com/us/201707111055434169-us-police-confidendence-poll/

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/07/11/Poll-Confidence-in-police-increases-to-historical-average/7941499788035/

 

 

 

I still trust the police, and unless something drastic happens, I always will.  It just seems like every week now there's something about an officer doing this or that.  Ultimately, maybe it's just the era we're in and we hear about it a lot more now as opposed to back then. 

2 minutes ago, Kallus Rourke said:

 

I still trust the police, and unless something drastic happens, I always will.  It just seems like every week now there's something about an officer doing this or that.  Ultimately, maybe it's just the era we're in and we hear about it a lot more now as opposed to back then. 

I also believe that the media is playing into the issue. The media sees that anything related to police using, what appears to be, excessive force creates conversation, and thus generates revenue. Therefore, they report on it as much as they can, which has its pros and cons. We get to hear about the actions of our law enforcement, but they take a lot of issues and cause division in the country with them.

 

8 hours ago, Hystery said:

What baffles me even more, is that the officer who shot the woman down "refused to be interrogated by investigators" and is "on a paid leave".

 

Like, what the fuck? If it was a random person who did that, he'd have his ass sat down on the bench of a cell already, without being paid for it. So just because he's a cop, he can just refuse to be interrogated and stay at home, still being paid? He killed a person for eff sake, that's one of the reasons why people lose trust in the police. When one officer does something bad, he's never treated like he has done something bad.

Surely if he had not done anything wrong he wouldn't mind making a statement? Ridiculous. In the UK, the police chiefs are very anti when someone shoots someone (usually from ethnic minority and usually considered to be unarmed). If that happened in the UK, he would probably be in the dock for murder right now. One extreme to the other. 

21 hours ago, Hystery said:

What baffles me even more, is that the officer who shot the woman down "refused to be interrogated by investigators" and is "on a paid leave".

 

Like, what the fuck? If it was a random person who did that, he'd have his ass sat down on the bench of a cell already, without being paid for it. So just because he's a cop, he can just refuse to be interrogated and stay at home, still being paid? He killed a person for eff sake, that's one of the reasons why people lose trust in the police. When one officer does something bad, he's never treated like he has done something bad.

Actually, in the US we have something called the 5th Amendment. You do not have to talk to investigators here, regardless of whether you are a cop or not. However, you are right in the fact that you would likely be in a cell by now (that is unless you went home on bail).