• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police: Officer in Missouri shot, Killed man who Pulled Gun..... [W:22]

Jerry said:
I've never owned or handled a filthy high-point peasant as I'm a member of the Colt master race, but I'm pretty sure that's a safety:



I could be wrong though.
Click to expand...


I was just on their website, and I think that you may be correct.

$189 MSRP for a new 9mm.

That is damn scary - probably got a trigger pull that is horrific on a good day.

That monster heavy trigger pull may have saved the cop.
 
SMTA said:
I was just on their website, and I think that you may be correct.

$189 MSRP for a new 9mm.

That is damn scary - probably got a trigger pull that is horrific on a good day.

That monster heavy trigger pull may have saved the cop.
Click to expand...
I gotta say I've never been a fan of the manual safety.

I'm trying to look up the Missouri PD standard pistol but so far all I can find is the current pistol in 9mm and they want to switch to a sig .40.
 
GreatNews2night said:
Almost all politicians are evil regardless of party or race.
Click to expand...

Can't agree with this, and given your other thoughtful comments I don't think you have such a un-nuanced view of the world either.

Politicians are human. They are in a tough job. Most of them are doing their best to do what they think is right for the country and their constituents. They make mistakes; that doesn't make them evil. Even my local tea party republican - Tom McClintock - isn't evil. I think he's wrong on many of the issues; I think he isn't willing to listen; I think he's desperate for a government paid position because he can't get a job in the private sector; I think he's a carpet-bagger (ran in a safe district, not where he lives). But he isn't evil. And actually, compared to other politicians, he's a lot more broke then them, so he's not even money-grabbing.

I used to live in George Miller's district; hard-working, I liked his stands on various issues, took care of his district, respected by his colleagues. Not evil; retiring now, but his replacement, DeSaulnier, is also hard-working; I've watched his career since he started running for office while owning a restaurant, and I respect him.

Most politicians are not evil; our election system certainly drives them into desperate fundraising which can lead to corruption. But that doesn't make them evil, and we seem to be unwilling to change the system, so what does that say about us?
 
ecofarm said:
Does anyone not think that cartoon is racist and antisemitic, not to mention the presumably hairy armed woman.

I think we need a poll.
Click to expand...

I never click on Jerry's links. I assume they are nothing I want to look at.
 
ecofarm said:
Does anyone not think that cartoon is racist and antisemitic, not to mention the presumably hairy armed woman.

I think we need a poll.
Click to expand...
The Appeal to Popularly fallacy lol
 
paddymcdougall said:
Can't agree with this, and given your other thoughtful comments I don't think you have such a un-nuanced view of the world either.

Politicians are human. They are in a tough job. Most of them are doing their best to do what they think is right for the country and their constituents. They make mistakes; that doesn't make them evil. Even my local tea party republican - Tom McClintock - isn't evil. I think he's wrong on many of the issues; I think he isn't willing to listen; I think he's desperate for a government paid position because he can't get a job in the private sector; I think he's a carpet-bagger (ran in a safe district, not where he lives). But he isn't evil. And actually, compared to other politicians, he's a lot more broke then them, so he's not even money-grabbing.

I used to live in George Miller's district; hard-working, I liked his stands on various issues, took care of his district, respected by his colleagues. Not evil; retiring now, but his replacement, DeSaulnier, is also hard-working; I've watched his career since he started running for office while owning a restaurant, and I respect him.

Most politicians are not evil; our election system certainly drives them into desperate fundraising which can lead to corruption. But that doesn't make them evil, and we seem to be unwilling to change the system, so what does that say about us?
Click to expand...

First of all, I spoke a bit with my tongue in my cheek.
But then, I didn't say that all politicians are evil; I just said "almost all" - and while in some Western democracies things can be a bit better as you point out with your examples, if we think of the world as a whole, yes, *most* politicians are evil, so all that I really need to correct if I take my tongue out of my cheek, is to substitute "most" for "almost all", since most worldwide are corrupt, and have their own interest at heart (that is, getting re-elected and accepting bribes and back-room deals and getting rich) rather than the interest of their constituents.

Often to even *want* to run for office, folks already have traits like greed and cravings for unmeasured power.

Now, there's the joke:

Do you know what are the top three priorities of a conservative politician?

1. Get re-elected
2. Get re-elected
3. Get re-elected

Do you know what are the top three priorities of a progressive politician?

1. Get re-elected
2. Get re-elected
3. Get re-elected
 
GreatNews2night said:
First of all, I spoke a bit with my tongue in my cheek.
But then, I didn't say that all politicians are evil; I just said "almost all" - and while in some Western democracies things can be a bit better as you point out with your examples, if we think of the world as a whole, yes, *most* politicians are evil, so all that I really need to correct if I take my tongue out of my cheek, is to substitute "most" for "almost all", since most worldwide are corrupt, and have their own interest at heart (that is, getting re-elected and accepting bribes and back-room deals and getting rich) rather than the interest of their constituents.

Often to even *want* to run for office, folks already have traits like greed and cravings for unmeasured power.

Now, there's the joke:

Do you know what are the top three priorities of a conservative politician?

1. Get re-elected
2. Get re-elected
3. Get re-elected

Do you know what are the top three priorities of a progressive politician?

1. Get re-elected
2. Get re-elected
3. Get re-elected
Click to expand...

Good joke!

I don't see "corrupt" as equivalent to "evil" (others may disagree)... and I agree if you expand politicians to those worldwide, the number ending up as corrupt and/or evil expands. And the pressure to raise funds to get re-elected - because that's what almost all of them want (besides the occasional Jim Webb) has led to corruption in quite a few politicians, as has the lust for power (Weiner and his stupid pics jumps to mind here)

By the way, while I haven't examined every politician, there is one fairly current politician I consider as close to evil as any have ever gotten. And that is Dick Cheney. I realize others on the forum may disagree, but when I look at his actions while in office - and since - he comes closest to qualifying.
 
paddymcdougall said:
Good joke!

I don't see "corrupt" as equivalent to "evil" (others may disagree)... and I agree if you expand politicians to those worldwide, the number ending up as corrupt and/or evil expands. And the pressure to raise funds to get re-elected - because that's what almost all of them want (besides the occasional Jim Webb) has led to corruption in quite a few politicians, as has the lust for power (Weiner and his stupid pics jumps to mind here)

By the way, while I haven't examined every politician, there is one fairly current politician I consider as close to evil as any have ever gotten. And that is Dick Cheney. I realize others on the forum may disagree, but when I look at his actions while in office - and since - he comes closest to qualifying.
Click to expand...

For me, corruption is evil, since you appropriate funds that would be best used for the good of your constituents, especially when you steal public money which happens less in the US (but does happen, if you expand the definition of stealing) but a lot more in the Third World, so, when you consider that for some corrupt guy to get rich, children will starve and die of infectious diseases because there will be no money left for school lunches, decent medical facilities and clean water, then, that's evil.
 
GreatNews2night said:
For me, corruption is evil, since you appropriate funds that would be best used for the good of your constituents, especially when you steal public money which happens less in the US (but does happen, if you expand the definition of stealing) but a lot more in the Third World, so, when you consider that for some corrupt guy to get rich, children will starve and die of infectious diseases because there will be no money left for school lunches, decent medical facilities and clean water, then, that's evil.
Click to expand...

Good point on the appropriation of public funds; I don't think that happens too often here, but I'm sure it does sometimes.
 
paddymcdougall said:
Good point on the appropriation of public funds; I don't think that happens too often here, but I'm sure it does sometimes.
Click to expand...

The way it happens here is more subtle. For example, recently in the news there was a report that some businesses had won contracts to sell supplies to the US military in debatable circumstances, and then sold the material in overpriced manner and with sub-standard specifications. This is not stealing as in taking money directly from public coffers and stuffing it in your pocket, but is still, when defined more broadly, stealing from public funds.
 
Jerry said:
Assessment takes less than a second.

It's called the "OODA loop". I learned about it in the Army and I'm certain police train some version of it also.
  • Observation: the collection of data by means of the senses.
  • Orientation: the analysis and synthesis of data to form one's current mental perspective.
  • Decision: the determination of a course of action based on one's current mental perspective.
  • Action: the physical playing-out of decisions.
Part of the training police undertake, which is why we trust them with firearms in the first place, develops the automatic response of pulling the service weapon and moving when a detainee produces a weapon.

A cop drawing his weapon and firing on someone who points a gun at him is in perfect harmony with police training and desired action. This is exactly what we, the people, want cops to do.
Click to expand...

Is there no assessing before the toy gun is pulled? For instance, "hey we just got a call that a young kid is pointing a gun at people, though the caller said it could be a toy... maybe we should figure out if he has a real gun before we shoot him?" The video is insane. They know this kid might have a gun or a toy gun, so their genius ****ing plan is to park the car right in front of him, and if he makes a sudden movement to put him on blast?

Can we be honest and just admit that wasn't handled as well as it could have been?
 
whysoserious said:
Is there no assessing before the toy gun is pulled?
Click to expand...
This shooting involved real firearms, no toys.

Your OODA loop cycles several times per second.

whysoserious said:
For instance, "hey we just got a call that a young kid is pointing a gun at people, though the caller said it could be a toy... maybe we should figure out if he has a real gun before we shoot him?"
Click to expand...
I recall that other story, here's the toy in question:

45294770.cms


.......even if I took a second to look at the gun, I know I still would have thought that was real.

whysoserious said:
The video is insane. They know this kid might have a gun or a toy gun, so their genius ****ing plan is to park the car right in front of him, and if he makes a sudden movement to put him on blast?
Click to expand...
I assume "put him on blast" is a euphemism for shoot? This thread is about a teen who pulled a very real firearm on a cop. Not a kid waiving a toy, but a teen pointing a real firearm at a cop.

whysoserious said:
Can we be honest and just admit that wasn't handled as well as it could have been?
Click to expand...
The shooting that this thread is about was handled perfectly.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
You got mad. You lost the game.

Here's your consolation prize:

NSFW


That's who the Ferguson protesters are all about. That's who they're defending. That's who their marching for. That's the behavior they endorse, in addition to cop killing.
Click to expand...


Some time back on the forum I posted that not only do I see no problem with Michael Brown being gunned down and that the shooting was justified, but further that the world is better off without Michael Brown. Even before your video, it was clear that of a 300 lb 18 year so bold as to slug a police officer in his car, he has and will hurt many other people worse, such as old people, women, and anyone else he can hurt for his amusement or profit. Glad he's dead.
 
joko104 said:
Some time back on the forum I posted that not only do I see no problem with Michael Brown being gunned down and that the shooting was justified, but further that the world is better off without Michael Brown. Even before your video, it was clear that of a 300 lb 18 year so bold as to slug a police officer in his car, he has and will hurt many other people worse, such as old people, women, and anyone else he can hurt for his amusement or profit. Glad he's dead.
Click to expand...

So people should get the death sentence and have it implemented immediately, no appeals or due process whatsoever, because they *might* in the future hurt someone? Hopefully in this brave new world of yours, no loved ones of yours will be executed this way for what someone thinks they *might* do in the future. While I believe that what happened in Ferguson maybe was justified (or not, I don't know), one thing I do know: your post contains one of the most appalling ideas I've read on this message board, which has no place in modern Western democracies. Over here we don't execute people because we think maybe they'll do something bad in the future. We usually reserve that for cases in which people are found to be guilty of heinous offenses, in a court of law, and once all appeals have been exhausted.

"Oh, let's kill the kid. Who knows if some day he'll hurt some woman or elderly person? Off with his head!"

Maybe you and your ideas should get a time machine and move back to the middle ages or the Wild West, or you should join ISIS or something. You'd be more surrounded with people who think like you. There's always a risk that someone will pick a beef with you and summarily execute you on spot with no right to defense or due process, but hey, you asked for it.
 
whysoserious said:
Is there no assessing before the toy gun is pulled? For instance, "hey we just got a call that a young kid is pointing a gun at people, though the caller said it could be a toy... maybe we should figure out if he has a real gun before we shoot him?" The video is insane. They know this kid might have a gun or a toy gun, so their genius ****ing plan is to park the car right in front of him, and if he makes a sudden movement to put him on blast?

Can we be honest and just admit that wasn't handled as well as it could have been?
Click to expand...

I think your hope of the "good guy" being able to discern between a toy, and real gun in the heat of the moment when the subject is for whatever reason NOT complying with verbal order, is the result of watching too much TV crime drama. These cops are human beings that we task with impossible jobs, then we turn on a dime, and want their heads on a platter when after the fact it isn't crystal clear like we see on Law and Order....

Also, you speak of a 12 year old like there has never been 12 year olds that would just as soon shoot you dead, and ride their bike away....Must be nice living in your easy viewed world.
 
whysoserious said:
Is there no assessing before the toy gun is pulled? For instance, "hey we just got a call that a young kid is pointing a gun at people, though the caller said it could be a toy... maybe we should figure out if he has a real gun before we shoot him?" The video is insane. They know this kid might have a gun or a toy gun, so their genius ****ing plan is to park the car right in front of him, and if he makes a sudden movement to put him on blast?

Can we be honest and just admit that wasn't handled as well as it could have been?
Click to expand...

The dispatcher only conveyed the bolded above part to the responding officers. Even if you were told that it might be a toy gun do you gamble on that hunch being correct when the gun is pulled on you?
 
GreatNews2night said:
So people should get the death sentence and have it implemented immediately, no appeals or due process whatsoever, because they *might* in the future hurt someone? Hopefully in this brave new world of yours, no loved ones of yours will be executed this way for what someone thinks they *might* do in the future. While I believe that what happened in Ferguson maybe was justified (or not, I don't know), one thing I do know: your post contains one of the most appalling ideas I've read on this message board, which has no place in modern Western democracies. Over here we don't execute people because we think maybe they'll do something bad in the future. We usually reserve that for cases in which people are found to be guilty of heinous offenses, in a court of law, and once all appeals have been exhausted.

"Oh, let's kill the kid. Who knows if some day he'll hurt some woman or elderly person? Off with his head!"

Maybe you and your ideas should get a time machine and move back to the middle ages or the Wild West, or you should join ISIS or something. You'd be more surrounded with people who think like you. There's always a risk that someone will pick a beef with you and summarily execute you on spot with no right to defense or due process, but hey, you asked for it.
Click to expand...

I never said anything about executions. What I posted is 1.) the officer shooting him was justified and 2.) society and the world is better off without him.

Some people only have empathy for those who do violence, never the victims. They make up any rationalizations. I don't. He was a violent thug and criminal. Therefore, it is a good thing he is no longer among people.
 
Last edited:
joko104 said:
I never said anything about executions. What I posted is 1.) the officer shooting him was justified and 2.) society and the world is better off without him.

Some people only have empathy for those who do violence, never the victims. They make up any rationalizations. I don't. He was a violent thug and criminal. Therefore, it is a good thing he is no longer among people.
Click to expand...

I bolded part of your statement; THAT part makes it sound like you are for executions with no trial.

Most of us think people need a trial; that cops shouldn't get to decide who is a thug and should die and who shouldn't. Due process is a very important part of our constitution and laws.

And how do you know if society is better off without him? What a judgement to make about someone that young. Do people never change in your opinion (if he actually was a criminal now)?
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
I seem to be vulnerable to making that error while typing on a mobile phone.

I expect police to control the situation when a group of people start to riot. However I have the expectation that police should not use force when it is not required.
Click to expand...

I would agree with you, but the standard of when force is percieved to be required is grey. Gotta judge police by the actions they take in response to the situation they saw compared with reality. That is to say, if what they percieve is reasonable given the reality and their action is justified in the situation they percieve, I'm ok with force. If their stated perception is ridiculously different from the reality of the situation, they either need serious help (in the case of a psychological condition), or to be punished (in the case of intentional use of unnecessary and harmful force). Either way, they should probably not be patrolling until it gets cleared up one way or the other.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The dispatcher only conveyed the bolded above part to the responding officers. Even if you were told that it might be a toy gun do you gamble on that hunch being correct when the gun is pulled on you?
Click to expand...

If that's the case, that's a huge miscommunication, wouldn't you say?

j-mac said:
I think your hope of the "good guy" being able to discern between a toy, and real gun in the heat of the moment when the subject is for whatever reason NOT complying with verbal order, is the result of watching too much TV crime drama. These cops are human beings that we task with impossible jobs, then we turn on a dime, and want their heads on a platter when after the fact it isn't crystal clear like we see on Law and Order....

Also, you speak of a 12 year old like there has never been 12 year olds that would just as soon shoot you dead, and ride their bike away....Must be nice living in your easy viewed world.
Click to expand...

Where did I ****ing say they should have been able to discern between a toy gun? Jesus, you conservatives just throw straw man after straw man, and then pat each other on the back when you knock them down.

Great job at arguing with a ****ing ghost, j-mac.
 
it was a huge miscommunication error

the 911 operator was told that the gun was "probably" a toy

that information was never given to the patrol officers

i dont know the procedure in place for such a thing

it was a large part of the story for the first few days

i have zero issue with the shooting....mostly because of that

and even if they were told it "might be" a toy......from a distance it sure in the hell didnt look like one

put yourself in those officer's shoes......as the kids starts to point that weapon at you

what do you do?
 
gdgyva said:
it was a huge miscommunication error

the 911 operator was told that the gun was "probably" a toy

that information was never given to the patrol officers

i dont know the procedure in place for such a thing

it was a large part of the story for the first few days

i have zero issue with the shooting....mostly because of that

and even if they were told it "might be" a toy......from a distance it sure in the hell didnt look like one

put yourself in those officer's shoes......as the kids starts to point that weapon at you

what do you do?
Click to expand...

So the police did nothing wrong when they barreled up on the boy and within seconds killed him?

Why is it never the police who are at fault when a person of color is killed by them?
 
Tettsuo said:
So the police did nothing wrong when they barreled up on the boy and within seconds killed him?

Why is it never the police who are at fault when a person of color is killed by them?
Click to expand...

who said that?

can you show me a quote on this thread where someone, anyone, has said that the police are perfect and never make mistakes?

i would love to put you in that position.....just to see how you react.......

someone points a weapon at YOU, and what....you just stand there waiting for them to pull the trigger?

in this case.....i dont see an error....that is my position......i would have fired also

and it wouldnt have freaking mattered if the kid was white, brown, black, yellow, or purple

in my opinion the officer saw the weapon.....not the color of the skin

but you can believe whatever you want......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom