Skip to main content
Home Off Topic

The cops just stood there and did nothing... absolutely nothing to stop the killing...for 55 minutes

2»

Replies

  • GardawgGardawg IslamoradaPosts: 15,143 AG
    I threw a pack of lit firecrackers which landed directly in front of the town cop. 

    The night court I had to go to was worth the fine just for the entertainment.

    Had a local drunk up on charges of having 'relations' with a goat.  
    The judge asked him why he would rather be with a goat than his girlfriend. He replied, "Your Honor, that goat is the only woman in town  that can satisfy my cravings."  He got his usual 30 day sentence.  Which he spent riding the garbage truck for the city. 
    "Forgiveness is a strange thing. It can be sometimes easier to forgive our enemies than our friends. It can be hardest of all to forgive people we love." Fred Rogers  
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 40,867 AG
    Tony Roma said:
    Cops are usually underpaid and disinterested. On foot, if you can get some separation within the first 50 yards he will give up and call for backup or the dog. If you get a real go getter take him over a few 6 foot privacy fences. They can’t keep up with all that gear on. So I’ve heard. 
    I saw a local news story once where the guy got caught by the dog. his interview was him saying "let them beat you or taser you, but don't let them turn the dog loose".  

    Last thing you want is the dog coming at you. 


    Former Mini Mart Magnate

    I am just here for my amusement. 

  • Tony RomaTony Roma Posts: 2,800 Captain
    Back in the day I could outrun just about anyone, but nobody outruns that dog. I remember an episode of COPS where a guy got run down by a one legged cop, it was awesome. 
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 19,220 AG
    dave44 said:
    Do you think running away from police is a justified reason to kill the person?


    Absolutely. (90% ?) Hit up Google to see how many times this has resulted in more murders.
    And there, we have it.

    He said the quiet part out loud.
  • ferris1248ferris1248 Posts: 21,690 Moderator
    dave44 said:
    dave44 said:
    Do you think running away from police is a justified reason to kill the person?


    Absolutely. Hit up Google to see how many times this has resulted in more murders.
    There ya go !   If someone doesn't comply with a police person's demands  they should be shot. 
    Sounds good! When they have a rap sheet as long as my leg we should issue a medal .

        Or are you making the all or nothing argument about babies with guns? 😂 
    You are very good at digressing.  Babies with guns has nothing to do with this topic but in your mind I guess it somehow does.  

    I guess you're ok with shooting a man in the back by a police officer who is supposedly trained not to do so. That's fine. It's the great thing about this country you deplore. Each can have their own beliefs. 

    "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole of the law. The rest is commentary."

    Rabbi Hillel (c20 BCE)

  • dave44dave44 Posts: 17,564 AG
    dave44 said:
    dave44 said:
    Do you think running away from police is a justified reason to kill the person?


    Absolutely. Hit up Google to see how many times this has resulted in more murders.
    There ya go !   If someone doesn't comply with a police person's demands  they should be shot. 
    Sounds good! When they have a rap sheet as long as my leg we should issue a medal .

        Or are you making the all or nothing argument about babies with guns? 😂 
    You are very good at digressing.  Babies with guns has nothing to do with this topic but in your mind I guess it somehow does.  

    I guess you're ok with shooting a man in the back by a police officer who is supposedly trained not to do so. That's fine. It's the great thing about this country you deplore. Each can have their own beliefs. 
      That’s right.
        I still think profiling is a pretty good start. Once you start frisking grandmas you have lost.
  • 2amigo2amigo Posts: 8,409 Admiral
    Tony Roma said:
    Cops are usually underpaid and disinterested. On foot, if you can get some separation within the first 50 yards he will give up and call for backup or the dog. If you get a real go getter take him over a few 6 foot privacy fences. They can’t keep up with all that gear on. So I’ve heard. 
    I always eyed the cop first. Fat?  I’m running. Looking fit? I’ll stay….
  • Tony RomaTony Roma Posts: 2,800 Captain
    Gardawg said:
    I threw a pack of lit firecrackers which landed directly in front of the town cop. 

    The night court I had to go to was worth the fine just for the entertainment.

    Had a local drunk up on charges of having 'relations' with a goat.  
    The judge asked him why he would rather be with a goat than his girlfriend. He replied, "Your Honor, that goat is the only woman in town  that can satisfy my cravings."  He got his usual 30 day sentence.  Which he spent riding the garbage truck for the city. 
    I remember that!!!, They did an interview with the victim. When the reporter asked the victim how he was dealing with the trauma , the victim replied, “ I appreciate your concern but it really wasn’t that baaaaaaaaad”
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 40,867 AG
    Gardawg said:
    I threw a pack of lit firecrackers which landed directly in front of the town cop. 

    The night court I had to go to was worth the fine just for the entertainment.

    Had a local drunk up on charges of having 'relations' with a goat.  
    The judge asked him why he would rather be with a goat than his girlfriend. He replied, "Your Honor, that goat is the only woman in town  that can satisfy my cravings."  He got his usual 30 day sentence.  Which he spent riding the garbage truck for the city. 
    I had an employee that when I hired him had a charge of 'health Safety-violation Distater preparedness emergency'. I was curious as to what he did to get charged with that. He lit off firecrackers in a public park in front of a cop as a joke. Heck of a charge for a few firecrackers. 
      

    Former Mini Mart Magnate

    I am just here for my amusement. 

  • lilwoodylilwoody BuladeanPosts: 1,512 Captain
    lilwoody said:
    tag said:
    Didn’t the same thing happen at Parkland? 
    It was a carbon copy, except no one showed up with a loved one dieing inside. Those cowards in that hall are very lucky there wasn't another mass casualty event in the hall when they stopped that man.
    What finally put a end to it was someone that had his wife in the school. I will wager if she hadn't been in there he would have not acted either. 
    A good thing that may come of this is Qualified Immunity and responsibility to protect may get before the Supreme Court for a review.

    According to the Supreme Court, qualified immunity is needed to make sure government workers are not deterred from acting in split-second situations and that government workers do not face financial harms from a flood of insubstantial and frivolous lawsuits

    SCOTUS just today said Miranda is unnecessary 

    Qualified Immunity is a cluster ++++ of circular lawfare. Any public offical (not only LEOs) can hide behind it for Constitutional violations because it has to be deemed a blatant violation (and here's the kicker) backed by a previous court ruling in the same circuit it happened in. It is virtually impossible to over come it and hold officers or officials personally responsible civilly unless something near exactly has been ruled on in the same circuit. How can a ruling be determined if there is no other ruling because there was no other ruling. Get the circular lawfare involved in the logic behind it.
    "Those who will trade freedom for security will have neither".
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 40,867 AG
    Without qualified immunity, every jackazz that got arrested would sue the cop claiming something like the hand cuffs were too tight. 

    Former Mini Mart Magnate

    I am just here for my amusement. 

  • RedactionRedaction Posts: 1,982 Captain
    edited June 24 #43
    Tony Roma said:
    So many things went wrong here, disgusting. Unfortunately the Supreme Court has already ruled law enforcement has no obligation to protect and serve. You would think with all those officers one hero would rise to the top. 
    Do you think it has anything to do with how our younger (35 and under) people grew up and what/who they idolized? We (50 and up) idolized real “Hero’s” or at least portrayed courageous hero’s on film. We played cops and robbers and war with toy guns. We dreamed of taking out the bad guy, at least I did anyway. 

    I don’t know but I agree, you would think the majority of those officers would have said “let’s roll”. 
  • Tony RomaTony Roma Posts: 2,800 Captain
    I do agree, the lines have been blurred. 50 and older had more defined lines of good guys and bad guys. John Wayne and Mickey Mantle. I’m sure some have better examples. The younger generations are much more cynical, you play the bad guy in violent video games, you root for the wrestler who was supposed to be the heel”the rock”. 
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 21,872 AG
    cadman said:
    lilwoody said:
    tag said:
    Didn’t the same thing happen at Parkland? 
    It was a carbon copy, except no one showed up with a loved one dieing inside. Those cowards in that hall are very lucky there wasn't another mass casualty event in the hall when they stopped that man.
    What finally put a end to it was someone that had his wife in the school. I will wager if she hadn't been in there he would have not acted either. 
    A good thing that may come of this is Qualified Immunity and responsibility to protect may get before the Supreme Court for a review.

    The courts, including the Supreme Court, have already ruled police officers have no duty to protect the individual unless they are in police custody. There was a lawsuit after the Parkland shooting and the court then ruled the police have no duty to protect individuals unless in custody. It also will not affect qualified immunity since case law is well established on this subject. 

    Tony Roma said:
    So many things went wrong here, disgusting. Unfortunately the Supreme Court has already ruled law enforcement has no obligation to protect and serve. You would think with all those officers one hero would rise to the top. 
    Not correct. The courts have ruled police have no responsibility to protect the individual. Police still have a responsibility to protect and serve the public. You have to distinguish between the public at large and the individual. 

    Police have a duty to track down and arrest criminals harming society, however, you can't hold them responsible if an individual is harmed during the commission of a crime. 


    Your typical lack of understanding or simply attempting to move the goal posts to try to be "right".  This had NOTHING to do with a policemen's legal obligations, it was pointing out that they were lazy cowards that let 19 people die.

    Just stop trying to be the never ending contrarian on every subject.
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 40,867 AG
    edited June 24 #46
    cadman said:
    lilwoody said:
    tag said:
    Didn’t the same thing happen at Parkland? 
    It was a carbon copy, except no one showed up with a loved one dieing inside. Those cowards in that hall are very lucky there wasn't another mass casualty event in the hall when they stopped that man.
    What finally put a end to it was someone that had his wife in the school. I will wager if she hadn't been in there he would have not acted either. 
    A good thing that may come of this is Qualified Immunity and responsibility to protect may get before the Supreme Court for a review.

    The courts, including the Supreme Court, have already ruled police officers have no duty to protect the individual unless they are in police custody. There was a lawsuit after the Parkland shooting and the court then ruled the police have no duty to protect individuals unless in custody. It also will not affect qualified immunity since case law is well established on this subject. 

    Tony Roma said:
    So many things went wrong here, disgusting. Unfortunately the Supreme Court has already ruled law enforcement has no obligation to protect and serve. You would think with all those officers one hero would rise to the top. 
    Not correct. The courts have ruled police have no responsibility to protect the individual. Police still have a responsibility to protect and serve the public. You have to distinguish between the public at large and the individual. 

    Police have a duty to track down and arrest criminals harming society, however, you can't hold them responsible if an individual is harmed during the commission of a crime. 


    Your typical lack of understanding or simply attempting to move the goal posts to try to be "right".  This had NOTHING to do with a policemen's legal obligations, it was pointing out that they were lazy cowards that let 19 people die.

    Just stop trying to be the never ending contrarian on every subject.
    I was addressing their statements, those statements did address a police officer's legal obligation.

    Why don't you stop being the contrarian? 

    Former Mini Mart Magnate

    I am just here for my amusement. 

  • ferris1248ferris1248 Posts: 21,690 Moderator
    Sniper119 said:
    As a 20 year police officer in SFL I will say that what occurred in Uvalde with the officers is completely unacceptable.  I accepted this job knowing that I will possibly at some point in my career be the "sacrificial lamb" to save another's life and my family also understands this fact.  The officers that stood outside are cowards plain and simple.  The officer's that were told not to go in and listened to that order are also cowards and I would have no problem telling them that to their faces.   I would rather lose my job than to let some admin tell me to let innocent children or adults continue to be killed or harm in any manner.  

    Since the qualified immunity subject came up I will say that it a two edged sword.  It gets abused by cops, fireman, politicians and govt. workers as a scape goat for bad behavior.    It has also helped those same people that actually needed it.  I am torn on getting rid of it vs keeping it.  

    There is no Duty to Act for officers unless we have created a special relationship with an individual.  I firmly believe that there is a moral obligation to the people that I come in contact with to protect them while I am dealing with them even though I do not "have to".  

    I applaud you sir!!    Kudos!!

    "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole of the law. The rest is commentary."

    Rabbi Hillel (c20 BCE)

  • joelunchbucketjoelunchbucket Posts: 1,687 Captain
    edited June 25 #49
    The taser/gun deal was a
    mistake made under pressure (caused by the one who died). 

    To say that the officer shot him because he was trying to escape is a far stretch. She meant to tase him and made a mistake, despite her training meant to avoid the very mistake she made. 
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 40,867 AG
    edited June 25 #50
    The taser/gun deal was a
    mistake made under pressure (caused by the one who died). 

    To say that the officer shot him because he was trying to escape is a far stretch. She meant to tase him and made a mistake, despite her training meant to avoid the very mistake she made. 

    the mistake cost her 2 years in prison.

    Former Mini Mart Magnate

    I am just here for my amusement. 

  • Turner River TerrorTurner River Terror Posts: 10,839 AG
    Maybe if the Perp had gotten 2 years in Prison 3 Charges ago  ...Well this might have never happened...just sayin
    Killin and Grillin :grin
  • joelunchbucketjoelunchbucket Posts: 1,687 Captain
    cadman said:
    The taser/gun deal was a
    mistake made under pressure (caused by the one who died). 

    To say that the officer shot him because he was trying to escape is a far stretch. She meant to tase him and made a mistake, despite her training meant to avoid the very mistake she made. 

    the mistake cost her 2 years in prison.
    And?

    Doesn't change the fact that it wasn’t intentional.

    Try running over a pedestrian because you make a mistake and hit the gas instead of your break. Manslaughter will land anyone in prison. That doesn’t mean it was murder. 
  • Tony RomaTony Roma Posts: 2,800 Captain
    Pulled over because of air fresheners hanging from his rear view, trainee cop was hot to trot and resulted in a fatal mistake
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 40,867 AG
    cadman said:
    The taser/gun deal was a
    mistake made under pressure (caused by the one who died). 

    To say that the officer shot him because he was trying to escape is a far stretch. She meant to tase him and made a mistake, despite her training meant to avoid the very mistake she made. 

    the mistake cost her 2 years in prison.
    And?

    Doesn't change the fact that it wasn’t intentional.

    Try running over a pedestrian because you make a mistake and hit the gas instead of your break. Manslaughter will land anyone in prison. That doesn’t mean it was murder. 
    The charge would be vehicular homicide and it has to be proven you were operating in a reckless manner. a mistake of hitting the wrong pedal might not fall under reckless if you were operating safely until that mistake unless drugs or alcohol were involved. It would depend on the circumstances that caused the accident. 

    A trained police officer should never mistake a gun for a taser, that is not a mistake, 

    Former Mini Mart Magnate

    I am just here for my amusement. 

  • lilwoodylilwoody BuladeanPosts: 1,512 Captain
    Sniper119 said:
    As a 20 year police officer in SFL I will say that what occurred in Uvalde with the officers is completely unacceptable.  I accepted this job knowing that I will possibly at some point in my career be the "sacrificial lamb" to save another's life and my family also understands this fact.  The officers that stood outside are cowards plain and simple.  The officer's that were told not to go in and listened to that order are also cowards and I would have no problem telling them that to their faces.   I would rather lose my job than to let some admin tell me to let innocent children or adults continue to be killed or harm in any manner.  

    Since the qualified immunity subject came up I will say that it a two edged sword.  It gets abused by cops, fireman, politicians and govt. workers as a scape goat for bad behavior.    It has also helped those same people that actually needed it.  I am torn on getting rid of it vs keeping it.  

    There is no Duty to Act for officers unless we have created a special relationship with an individual.  I firmly believe that there is a moral obligation to the people that I come in contact with to protect them while I am dealing with them even though I do not "have to".  

    I applaud you sir!!    Kudos!!
    It is a shame more officers do not share your ethic.
    As for the QI issue it needs to be completely overhauled. The circular, insurmountable lawfare needs to be eliminated and a much less cumbersome method to deal with blatant violations instituted. 
    I think it would be simple once the lawfare portion was.removed. Any lawyer accepting a case on a percentage of judgment would be liable for the defenses fees incurred if the suit fails. This would weed out 90% of all the frivolous suits but still leave the door opened for blatant violations.
    The same would work in reverse for Civil Asset Forfeiture. But would add to the CAF reform a felony conviction directly related to the asset to be necessary to keep money or property.
    "Those who will trade freedom for security will have neither".
  • 2amigo2amigo Posts: 8,409 Admiral
    Tony Roma said:
    Pulled over because of air fresheners hanging from his rear view, trainee cop was hot to trot and resulted in a fatal mistake

    Have you smelled those things??.  PIcked up by an UBER where 6 were hanging in various places.  Horrible......although not worth getting killed over, but horrible......
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 40,867 AG
    2amigo said:
    Tony Roma said:
    Pulled over because of air fresheners hanging from his rear view, trainee cop was hot to trot and resulted in a fatal mistake

    Have you smelled those things??.  PIcked up by an UBER where 6 were hanging in various places.  Horrible......although not worth getting killed over, but horrible......
    I bought one once, Hung it on the mirror, and parked the truck in the sun. I could hardly breathe when I got back in, those things are strong. 

    Former Mini Mart Magnate

    I am just here for my amusement. 

  • joelunchbucketjoelunchbucket Posts: 1,687 Captain
    cadman said:
    cadman said:
    The taser/gun deal was a
    mistake made under pressure (caused by the one who died). 

    To say that the officer shot him because he was trying to escape is a far stretch. She meant to tase him and made a mistake, despite her training meant to avoid the very mistake she made. 

    the mistake cost her 2 years in prison.
    And?

    Doesn't change the fact that it wasn’t intentional.

    Try running over a pedestrian because you make a mistake and hit the gas instead of your break. Manslaughter will land anyone in prison. That doesn’t mean it was murder. 
    The charge would be vehicular homicide and it has to be proven you were operating in a reckless manner. a mistake of hitting the wrong pedal might not fall under reckless if you were operating safely until that mistake unless drugs or alcohol were involved. It would depend on the circumstances that caused the accident. 

    A trained police officer should never mistake a gun for a taser, that is not a mistake, 
    So you believe that the officer intended to pull the gun rather than the taser. Ok. 

    I don’t. 
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 21,872 AG
    lilwoody said:
    Sniper119 said:
    As a 20 year police officer in SFL I will say that what occurred in Uvalde with the officers is completely unacceptable.  I accepted this job knowing that I will possibly at some point in my career be the "sacrificial lamb" to save another's life and my family also understands this fact.  The officers that stood outside are cowards plain and simple.  The officer's that were told not to go in and listened to that order are also cowards and I would have no problem telling them that to their faces.   I would rather lose my job than to let some admin tell me to let innocent children or adults continue to be killed or harm in any manner.  

    Since the qualified immunity subject came up I will say that it a two edged sword.  It gets abused by cops, fireman, politicians and govt. workers as a scape goat for bad behavior.    It has also helped those same people that actually needed it.  I am torn on getting rid of it vs keeping it.  

    There is no Duty to Act for officers unless we have created a special relationship with an individual.  I firmly believe that there is a moral obligation to the people that I come in contact with to protect them while I am dealing with them even though I do not "have to".  

    I applaud you sir!!    Kudos!!
    It is a shame more officers do not share your ethic.
    As for the QI issue it needs to be completely overhauled. The circular, insurmountable lawfare needs to be eliminated and a much less cumbersome method to deal with blatant violations instituted. 
    I think it would be simple once the lawfare portion was.removed. Any lawyer accepting a case on a percentage of judgment would be liable for the defenses fees incurred if the suit fails. This would weed out 90% of all the frivolous suits but still leave the door opened for blatant violations.
    The same would work in reverse for Civil Asset Forfeiture. But would add to the CAF reform a felony conviction directly related to the asset to be necessary to keep money or property.

    If police had to PERSONALLY reimburse a person double what they illegally confiscated, it would end overnight.  Even if the responsible government had to do it, it would end immediately.  Civil asset forfeiture is a crime of piracy on the open road.
  • lilwoodylilwoody BuladeanPosts: 1,512 Captain
    Yup BB, CAF has turned every officer into a privateer, complete with a Letter of Margue. Only difference the commerce being raided is not he enemy's but citizens. But I suppose we are considered the enemies now.
    "Those who will trade freedom for security will have neither".
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Digital Now Included!

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

Preview This Month's Issue

Buy Digital Single Issues

Don't miss an issue.
Buy single digital issue for your phone or tablet.

Buy Single Digital Issue on the Florida Sportsman App

Other Magazines

See All Other Magazines

Special Interest Magazines

See All Special Interest Magazines

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Florida Sportsman stories delivered right to your inbox.

Advertisement

Phone Icon

Get Digital Access.

All Florida Sportsman subscribers now have digital access to their magazine content. This means you have the option to read your magazine on most popular phones and tablets.

To get started, click the link below to visit mymagnow.com and learn how to access your digital magazine.

Get Digital Access

Not a Subscriber?
Subscribe Now