Crime De’Von Bailey police shooting. Edit: settlement of 3 million reached.

[Social Distance Warrior]

Ladies and gentlemen, in this thread you will discover everything wrong with leftist ideology. See and discover what side they take and the mental gymnastics they perform to defend this POS

 

[HereticBD]

The supreme court has ruled that an officer must have reason to believe that the suspect is an immediate threat.

Yes, being a suspect in an armed robbery covers that.

So while he may be a suspect in an armed robbery, at what point during the chase was he an immediate threat?

The moment the armed suspect fled.

At what point, if no action is taken, will there be injury to someone?

Are you serious? If no action is taken against a presumed armed and dangerous suspect, and the suspect gets away and then goes to another place and shoots and kills a guy, that's the potential danger they are preventing. It could be an hour later, or a day later, or a week later. The inaction to take down a fleeing armed and dangerous suspect, would in turn be part of the cause for any further violence perpetrated by that suspect they failed to bring down.

Again, this isn't complicated stuff.

 

[LMP]

against a presumed armed and dangerous suspect, and the suspect gets away and then goes to another place and shoots and kills a guy, that's the potential danger they are preventing. It could be an hour later, or a day later, or a week later. The inaction to take down a fleeing armed and dangerous suspect, would in turn be part of the cause for any further violence perpetrated by that suspect they failed to bring down.

Hours later, days later, weeks later are not immediate threats. The police were right behind him in pursuit. I think you are not understanding what an immediate threat is.

 

[HereticBD]

Hours later, days later, weeks later are not immediate threats. The police were right behind him in pursuit. I think you are not understanding what an immediate threat is.

Okay, I can't deal with your ignorance anymore. You're either trolling or dumb. Either way, I'm not dealing with it anymore.

Don't run from the cops. The end.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

A pedo illegally possessing a handgun? The cops should be promoted.

Again...take a good look at this thread...see who the leftists will defend

 

[LMP]

Okay, I can't deal with your ignorance anymore. You're either trolling or dumb. Either way, I'm not dealing with it anymore.

Don't run from the cops. The end.

You can get pissy and throw a fit if you want. As I stated if the officers saw the gun before shooting him, then I would say that this shooting is legally justified. If the officers only found the gun on him after he was shot, then then they would have been unable to identify it as a threat. A person could try and argue that the armed robbery is legal grounds to assume that he had a gun. Without witnessing the crime, they wouldnt be able to actually identify him as the perpetrator of the crime. Fleeing from the police is not grounds to shoot a suspect.

I'm failing to see why you are having such a hard time understanding why we frown on shooting fleeing suspects in the back. Yet, here we are with you keeping on repeating "dont run from the police", as if it is some sort of legal grounds for them to shoot a suspect. Not only that, but you want to include weeks into your definition of what immediate means. That alone blows my minds here. So now you want to throw your hands up and call me a troll or stupid, nice.

 

[Mcountry]

video


looks fairly clear that he was shot from behind while running from the police. seems certain the guy is a criminal that needed to be dealt with, but i dont think this is considered proper use of deadly force.

Sexual assault on a child means i have zero fucks if you live or die

 

[ineverpost]

I need to know the political party of everyone involved before I can make an informed decision

 

[Fight To Win]

Okay, but they obviously were in pursuit of an armed suspect. You're operating on a false assumption that they didn't know who the guy was. That's not a factor in this case. In this case, they shot a fleeing armed suspect. What's the argument against it? If that guy gets away, he could theoretically endanger more lives. Is that a better response? Let them run away, put more lives in danger, and don't shoot until you're staring down the barrel of his gun?

I don't understand what you're arguing here, as pertains to this case. It was a good shoot, yes?

Of course it's a better response. Black lives matter more than any lives this guy would end up taking, including, paradoxically enough, other black lives.

 

[BJ@LW&WW]

Sexual assault on a child means i have zero fucks if you live or die

jesus christ 3500 posts in like 5 months. get outside man

 

[Gregolian]

Wait this motherfucker was a convicted pedophile committing more crimes?

Promote those officers post-haste and buy them a bottle of Blue Label Glenfidditch or MacCallan.

 

[calavera2]

He was shot in the back while running. I would say at that point he wasnt a threat, it is an unjustified shooting. Is there any evidence that he was a threat at that point?

Fleeing felon with a gun...yhea it's a good shoot.

 

[Gregolian]

jesus christ 3500 posts in like 5 months. get outside man

To be fair some of us work boring office jobs...

 

[LMP]

Fleeing felon with a gun...yhea it's a good shoot.

Cops dont know he is a felon at that point. Cops would still need to identify the gun, not just find it later. Better yet, he should have the gun in his hands before they shoot.

 

[calavera2]

Cops dont know he is a felon at that point. Cops would still need to identify the gun, not just find it later. Better yet, he should have the gun in his hands before they shoot.

I only read the summary in the OP but if he was ID's as the armed robber and fled the scene with a gun...it's a good shoot even if shot in the back. Rationale being that he would be an immediate deadly threat to other citizens.

 

[calavera2]

Ladies and gentlemen, in this thread you will discover everything wrong with leftist ideology. See and discover what side they take and the mental gymnastics they perform to defend this POS

You sound kinda nutty and too heavily invested in denigrating what you believe to be leftist ideology.

 

[LMP]

I only read the summary in the OP but if he was ID's as the armed robber and fled the scene with a gun...it's a good shoot even if shot in the back. Rationale being that he would be an immediate deadly threat to other citizens.

You can review my other post in this thread to read my arguement over this. From my understanding the police were operating on a description of the men.

 

[calavera2]

You can review my other post in this thread to read my arguement over this. From my understanding the police were operating on a description of the men.

That would certainly change the dynamic....release the tapes!

 

[RoosterHucklebuck]

If he was running with a gun in his hand, then he was a threat to the Police and to society. You cannot let an armed suspect gain a better vantage point or take someone hostage.

Justice was served.

 

[DragRacer]

I disagree.
I think a suspect should have to fire a shot or at least threaten to use the gun on someone else before lethal force is used against him. Running away with it, with the potential to use it later isn’t enough IMO.
We shouldn’t be executing people who could potentially hurt someone else, it should be a situation where they are likely to hurt someone else.

If he was running with a gun in his hand, then he was a threat to the Police and to society. You cannot let an armed suspect gain a better vantage point or take someone hostage.

Justice was served.