IceWeaselX
821
47
9
Sorry for the Fox link, that's the local news outlet that updated first.
No idea what the chase was about, but he fled from authorities directly into JC Penney, hitting 5 people in the process.
Here's the fucked up bit. Yes, he injured people with the truck. But that threat ended the instant he exited the vehicle and fled on foot, unarmed. *Multiple* agencies drew their weapons and gunned down the unarmed runner.
Sounds like an execution to me.
Tagged politics because guns and America.
whskeyB4brkfst
They were on a mission from God, but the cops had SCMODS. https://youtu.be/IIdGxR-aU6o?si=srPZH6eRDvd60XyH
conklin5
I'd be more worried about the cops opening fire in a mall than the guy running from them.
GiddyKipper
Just playing devil’s advocate - I’m not disputing ACAB, but without alllll the details / CCTV etc, it’s impossible to know *for sure* this was absolutely wrong … was he about to steal a car for example?
animatronicChristmasChickens
There were multiple active shooters at the mall. The fact that they were cops doesn't change the fact that they were active shooters
FartsSmellBad
There obviously were multiple active shooters at that mall
laserfrog
Police are paperworkers. They are not judges. They are not to be executioners.
Bigblackdick69
Trying to agree with you right now but I really can't. They carry guns for a reason. That was one of them
https://media1.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1a3hjcDFyYjUzdXhoNWliaDdhMDF1ZnpsdjFqbjFyaHpvMTNyZXZ2dCZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/7BK3ZB7nNf2Jq/200w.webp
ArcUlfr
They should have taken him alive. That being said, this isn't nearly the worst example of misuse of force by the police (depressingly enough).
RElGNMAN
JohnWickdidnothingwrong
There was an active shooter, he was the one shooting dude in the back.
Maxgaap
The term active shooter is used to characterize shooters who are targeting victims indiscriminately and at a large scale, who oftentimes, will either commit suicide or intend to be killed by police.
Maxgaap
In common law, the fleeing felon rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight. Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited in 1985 to non-lethal force in most cases by Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1. The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily
Maxgaap
harm to the officer or others." A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead...however...Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force.
— Justice Byron White, Tennessee v. Garner
Bigblackdick69
Driving into a mall I feel is also deadly force, just because he left the vehicle doesn't mean he still wasn't a threat.
maybeamonster
there are plenty of people that get genuinely fucked over by the police that we don't need to trot out scumbags that got shot after running over five people. fuck this guy.
JohnWickdidnothingwrong
Not how it fucking works.
maybeamonster
"The modern fleeing felon rule permits police officers to use deadly
force when necessary to prevent the escape of a person who has
committed a violent felony
https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1424&context=flr
maybeamonster
in case there's any question, running over a bunch of people while trying to evade arrest is gonna be a violent felony
dpmb69
Since when do cops get to make that decision? You assume that driver voluntarily drove into the store when it’s just as likely that the cops failed to do a proper stopping maneuver and forced him to crash into the store. Not defending the driver but the cops are not supposed to shoot people in the back.
maybeamonster
from what I've read, they tried pulling over some swerving drunk, who took off at max speed for 20 miles and then ran over a bunch of people, and they shot him rather than letting him run off and continue his bullshit. the guy didn't surrender or stop trying to flee, he was still running,and honestly,fuck him. there's a lot of cases where cops do the wrong thing, but putting down someone fleeing after just trying to kill a bunch of people is fine by me. should they wait till he gets another car?
dpmb69
So drunk driving is now a death penalty offense in Texas? Doesn’t even need a trial? Just shoot him in the back and call it a day I guess.
maybeamonster
considering drunk drivers kill a small city 11,000 people a year, I could give a shit if these irresponsible sacks of shit are pruned from the populace. take a fucking uber or have the responsibility not to get smashed you fucking shitheads.
if police literally watch you try to kill someone, you are an obvious danger to the public. taking you down if you refuse to surrender to legal process is completely fine by me.
this isn't some bullshit police no-knock. the guy was an active menace.
dpmb69
Until he wasn’t. He crashed and tried to flee the scene on foot. Again, not defending the driver but would it really be that hard for a bunch of cops to tackle an unarmed drunk in a department store? A store that was apparently full of customers which could have easily been hit by a stray bullet. Just seems excessive to me.