GregT wrote:whether a gun is present or not? Does that in of itself justify shooting somebody multiple times at point blank range?
I don't know enough details about the Louisiana incident, to give an opinion.
I've already been wrong once in the thread, so I don't want to go on just what I've heard on tv, but I thought I heard the guy was *handcuffed*. So that makes a difference. Even if someone shouted "he has a gun!", if he was *handcuffed* then that's no threat or possibility he's reaching for a gun.
Ultimately though, this will be up to investigators to figure out, and then possibly a jury.
And THAT is our rule of law in this country, NOT an Afghan war vet turning terrorist and traitor.
If people want to protest then the ONLY acceptable thing is NONVIOLENT -- marches, sit-ins and VOTES.
It would appear to me that some of those who have been hired by us to serve and protect, may have gone a tad beyond the call of duty.
It's a "call of duty" gun culture overall, Greg, that's the problem. And then it's an arms race, between police and what they face on the streets.
If everyone has a darn AR these days, next thing you know police will have to start carrying these too as standard issue, instead of their pistols.
And it's just an arms race, and cycle. The answer is in addressing the root issues -- too many guns, and too much "call of duty" gun culture in the South and out west, the red states.
If police pull back, then who loses? WE do, tax paying suburbanite home owners. Crime would skyrocket, if the police are forced back. Property values would go down. Chaos would reign. NRA and Republicans say everyone wearing body armor and armed with AR's is the answer, as if the suburbs should be warzones. I say that's NOT how America should be, because it never has been -- why on earth would anyone want that?