You mean besides the relatives of the guy who got shot?marksiwel wrote:do you really think ANYONE thinks the cops are the bad guys in situations like these?
It seems like there is always someone saying, "they didn't have to shoot him."
- Jim
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
You mean besides the relatives of the guy who got shot?marksiwel wrote:do you really think ANYONE thinks the cops are the bad guys in situations like these?
true. But can you think of any Anti-Cop media folks out there? Just like I cant find people who are "against the troops"seamusTX wrote:You mean besides the relatives of the guy who got shot?marksiwel wrote:do you really think ANYONE thinks the cops are the bad guys in situations like these?
It seems like there is always someone saying, "they didn't have to shoot him."
- Jim
I can't think of any reporters who are consistently anti-police, but they sure jump on any implication of police wrongdoing.marksiwel wrote:true. But can you think of any Anti-Cop media folks out there? Just like I cant find people who are "against the troops"
I'm sorry against the troops and in Journalism or PolticsseamusTX wrote:I can't think of any reporters who are consistently anti-police, but they sure jump on any implication of police wrongdoing.marksiwel wrote:true. But can you think of any Anti-Cop media folks out there? Just like I cant find people who are "against the troops"
They tend to do the same thing with all authority figures.
As for people who are "against the troops," have you forgotten about the Westboro Baptist Church idiots?
The news story said that the officer that was struck did not have life-threatening injuries. That leaves a lot of room for serious damage.
- Jim
This begs an interesting question. You can intentionally defend yourself and others. But can you unintentionally do so? Is an instinctive reaction like this officer had defensible?the LEO reacted to stop the threat he perceived from the driver - intentional or not