Quote:
Originally Posted by quaker oats
The thing is @ uh-oh is that "pointing that out as a possibility" is justifying their actions, even if that's not your intention. And yes there is a blind spot on the video, but the surrounding information we have pretty much rules it out as a possibility. In order to reach for his gun and fire in that position he:
-would have had to be completely unaffected by the taser or the intensity of having two dudes on top of him with a gun in his face
-have explosive hips to extend his arm like that with two other men on top of him
-And be able to sell surrender with one side of his body while simultaneously acting a completely different way with the other side of his body. For emphasis' sake, I'll remind you: two dudes are on top of him with a gun in his face.
Try this: get tackled, tasered, have two men on top of you with a gun in your face and in a split second rub your stomach and pat your head with perfect execution. Throw the video of it up on YouTube and I'll take your point seriously. Until then, that kind of argument defies all logic and provides a ridiculous rationalization of their behavior, regardless of whether or not that's your intention. |
you are attaching extra parameters to it like somehow if he reaches his gun he has to miraculously aim it directly into each of their faces as well. all he has to do is get his hand in his pocket, and pull it out. thats it. that would be justifiable enough, with his hand offscreen he could be reaching that pocket.
look at it from the cops point of view, if you and another man have tackled, tasered and wrestled this man to the point of both of you on top of him, and you lose control of his free hand that is going towards the pocket where you know he has a gun. should you further endanger yourself and others, and keep wrestling him? or does your police training kick in and you neutralize the threat?
literally all i'm saying is taking a stance one way or another is ridiculous, i can see both viewpoints, you and others refuse to. to the point that i have to spell out the other viewpoint, to the point where it seems like that is my sole viewpoint lol.
either way now i just keep arguing the same points so there is no point to this. my buzz is kicking in and the main cards starting soon. i'm over this futile debate.