Austin Police Officer Involved in Shooting

[RoyTheHammer]

Looking foolish is acting like there is any good reason to shoot an unarmed person in the back. Can you answer that question, RTH? When can one justifiably shoot an unarmed person in the back?

You didn't say "an unarmed man" in the post i was replying to. You said there was never justification for shooting anyone in the back.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

We've already established that at no point was a weapon found on Jackson. You can't really be this dense, can you?

lol

Reread your post here and tell me who the dense one is..

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

You didn't say "an unarmed man" in the post i was replying to. You said there was never justification for shooting anyone in the back.

Fact 1) even the police admit he was unarmed.

Fact 2) he was shot in the back of the neck.

Can you find any way to justify that?

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

lol

Reread your post here and tell me who the dense one is..

I reread it and it's still you.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Fact 1) even the police admit he was unarmed.

Fact 2) he was shot in the back of the neck.

Can you find any way to justify that?

There are many reasons that, based off of only those two facts, shooting someone from behind could be justified.

Also, please stop saying that he was unarmed.. as it has no relevance to your complaint.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

I reread it and it's still you.

lol

Ok.. well we will leave it at then then.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

There are many reasons that, based off of only those two facts, shooting someone from behind could be justified.

Please elaborate on what those reasons could be.

Also, please stop saying that he was unarmed.. as it has no relevance to your complaint.

It is relevant. You're the one complaining about me not mentioning if he was armed or not.

Remember? Here is your quote.

You didn't say "an unarmed man" in the post i was replying to. You said there was never justification for shooting anyone in the back.

C'mon, RTH, tell us when it's justifiable to shoot an unarmed man in the back without sounding like Jack Bauer.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

lol

Ok.. well we will leave it at then then.

After you "investigate" your idea that it's OK to shoot an unarmed man in the back and find a legitimate reason, make sure to come back and let us know.

OK?

 

[RoyTheHammer]

It is relevant. You're the one complaining about me not mentioning if he was armed or not.

It is NOT relevant.. you know why?

Because unlike silly civilians who think you have it all figured out, police officers and detectives don't have the benefit of hindsight and knowing whether a man is armed or unarmed during a pursuit.

Understand that?

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

It is NOT relevant.. you know why?

Because unlike silly civilians who think you have it all figured out, police officers and detectives don't have the benefit of hindsight and knowing whether a man is armed or unarmed during a pursuit.

Understand that?

So by that logic police can shoot anyone in the back since they're unsure if they're armed or unarmed.

Wow, that's brilliant!

 

[RoyTheHammer]

So by that logic police can shoot anyone in the back since they're unsure if they're armed or unarmed.

Wow, that's brilliant!

That would be incorrect.

Sigh.. this is like having a discussion with a 5 year old.

I'll leave you to your protests and chalk doggies..

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

That would be incorrect.

Sigh.. this is like having a discussion with a 5 year old.

I'll leave you to your protests and chalk doggies..

And I'll wait for your childish reasoning providing us with a justifiable reason for anyone with a hint of foresight to shoot someone in the back.

I'll leave you with you Jack Bauer action figures.

I don't think your idea of shooting people in the back would hold much weight regardless of who it is. But I'm positive if this was one of your family members you'd be signing a different tune.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

And I'll wait for your childish reasoning providing us with a justifiable reason for anyone with a hint of foresight to shoot someone in the back.

I'll leave you with you Jack Bauer action figures.

I don't think your idea of shooting people in the back would hold much weight regardless of who it is. But I'm positive if this was one of your family members you'd be signing a different tune.

I wouldn't be singing at all until i found out what exactly they did.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

I wouldn't be singing at all until i found out what exactly they did.

Well, I'll make sure never to turn my back to you. That's for sure.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Well, I'll make sure never to turn my back to you. That's for sure.

Well you have no idea who i am.. so im guessing that'll end up being a difficult task for you.

Later, McCoy.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Well you have no idea who i am.. so im guessing that'll end up being a difficult task for you.

Later, McCoy.

*cringes

 

[RoyTheHammer]

*cringes

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

I'll leave you with the green smilie face. LOL

By the way, the green dog was funny, I thought. I'm friends with a guy whose dog was shot by the police. He's a good dude. I assume it was he who drew those figures on the ground. Anyway, I thought it was clever symbolism. I'm pretty sure his dog was innocent too.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

I'll leave you with the green smilie face. LOL

By the way, the green dog was funny, I thought. I'm friends with a guy whose dog was shot by the police. He's a good dude. I assume it was he who drew those figures on the ground. Anyway, I thought it was clever symbolism. I'm pretty sure his dog was innocent too.

Dogs are always innocent.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Dogs are always innocent.

I would think so too, but they shot him in the back so he must have done something wrong.