TexasCHLforum.com

mojo84 wrote:Soccerdad, agree with this statement of yours.

Unfortunately, there is not enough on that video for me to make a definitive conclusion on whether the shooting was justified.

I would also add there isn't enough to objectively make a definitive conclusion it wasn't.

mojo84 wrote:Here is another good article that provides conflicting info.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/co ... -by-police

Like I said previously, it "appears" to me he was reaching for something. I made no definitive conclusions. You appear to be the one that has though.

Based on your comments, I guess all roadblocks of people that have been breaking the law are "ambushes".

There is no one on here harder oncops when are obviously in the wrong than me. I have even been erroneously accused of being anticop. In this instance, we have people that have been breaking the law, wouldn't stop for the cops so a roadblock was set up and it APPEARS the guy was shot after reaching for something on the left side of his body. I believe based on these three things and if one objectively looks at this, it APPEARS the shooting MAY have been justified.

Soccerdad, I fully understand who we are talking about. Do you understand we are talking about armed peoplofficehave been illegally occupying a government office and didn't stop for the police like the other vehicle did? Haven't we discussed on here before that a charging vehicle is a deadly threat. A vehicle not stopping at a road block MAY be justification to shoot.

Have we all become so jaded and cynical we just can't objectively evaluate what we see?

Javier730 wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I appreciate your response but I do think we need to look at this stuff objectively and not through the tainted lens that the cops are always wrong and there's a big conspiracy and cover-up behind every event.

We are talking about a government agency that has been shown to be dishonest in the past. When dealing with a known liar, it is not biased or tainted to assume that they might be lying yet again. It is logical.

Alot of police officers have been caught lying, that does not mean you can call the entire agency liars everytime they speak.

mojo84 wrote:I appreciate your response but I do think we need to look at this stuff objectively and not through the tainted lens that the cops are always wrong and there's a big conspiracy and cover-up behind every event.

Javier730 wrote:

parabelum wrote:As he approaches the blockade, Mr. Finicum clearly swerves to the left to avoid colliding with the patrol units.

His brake pedal would of worked better at avoiding the collision.

mojo84 wrote:It appears to me he reached for something under his jacket on the left side. I am on my phone and the picture is small but I think he could have been carrying a gun in the cross draw position and he reached for it.

Has it been reported there was a gun on him and where it was?