I think the amount of shots is certainly worthy of high scrutiny, but I disagree with what you're saying.

Anything worth shooting is worth shooting multiple times, especially if you think the other person has a gun. Unless you completely stop the threat with one round, you keep going. I think that is a big problem in these cases, because if they can explain away firing initially, it is difficult to say the amount of rounds fired changes it from self-defense to anything else.

Reasonable fear has nothing to do with the totality of the circumstances. I have no idea what really happened, but the comments about a gun certainly add to the argument that at least initially, the officers reasonably feared for their lives.

Could you send me a PM with any kind of documention on this?

I don't think "anything worth shooting" is worth shooting multiple times. Especially from the professional standpoint of an officer of the law. A shooting such as this is expecting of rival gangs who harbor hate behind their bullets. Self-defense is just a crutch that the NYPD has used for years to justify wrongful slaughters such as these.

5 unarmed suspects (that was reported) gunned down in 10 years...1 cop convicted in all that time...not too much more you need.

Amadou Diallo
Patrick Dorismond
Ousmane Zongo
Timothy Stansbury
Sean Bell

And the city has paid close to 12 million out to these families in that time.....

And BTB Nappy, those studys cover much more than NYPD.

Actually Michael Vick got thrown in prison for, over a 6-7 year span, helping to fund and operate an illegal gambling/dog fighting ring that crossed interstate lines.......a federal offense.

...and I'll tell anyone to go to hell if they think what happened to those dogs was not that big of a deal because they were just "damn dogs". Mutilating and butchering domesticated animals is about as sick as it gets. All of those pieces of shit should be shot on the spot.


Sorry. End rant.

At any rate police brutality is something that needs to be addressed by the appropriate persons and since it fails to be corrected you've got angry and ignorant individuals who choose to take the law into their own hands. I'm not condoning people running around and enforcing the whole "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" concept, but I can't blame these individuals for feeling the way they do.

Yay!

No.

But I laugh at most things and most people. Laughter doesn't mean that something more substantive is not happening.

waitwaitwaaaaaaait!!!



MACK!!!!

who said that the dogs were domesticated??!!!

hehe!

It depends on the circumstances.

I can think of plenty of situations that I have seen where once shot just isn't going to get the job done.

Do you condemn or condone people for excusing what they did by accusing someone of brutality?

Or perhaps person trying to deflect responsibilities and thus their own actions or deeds.

I'm not going to condone people for accusing someone of brutality due to their specific reasons on why something is considered brutality. You've got many African-Americans who've decided that this shooting was racially charged and those who do not. I can't say that I agree with AA's who believe this shooting was about race because two of the officers involved were AA.

They ran and operated a professional style kennel for the sake of raising and training overly aggressive pit bulls. I'd say that = domesticated. They certainly weren't wild, random dogs.

Just my opinion though yo.