kreetx 5 days ago

I have introspected this thoroughly. What I'm saying is if you're confiscated a gun in some highly urgent situation, then the people doing the seizing get even more tense in their mental state, so accidents are easy to make.

While it may be worth it to investigate the situation and there may some blame on the officer, then the allusions people are making (perhaps not you) are completely out of whack.

I'm sure it's inconvenient if your party or candidate lost the presidential election, but you shouldn't turn to lying for retribution.

  • AngryData 4 days ago

    Calling this an "accident" is a pretty huge stretch I must say. They dumped rounds in the guy while he was collapsed face down on the pavement and unarmed.

    • kreetx 4 days ago

      All of the officers didn't know he was unarmed nor whether it was his last firearm.

      • AngryData 4 days ago

        If they didn't know they shouldn't have been firing at him. Soldiers in active warzones wouldn't be given such considerations and allowed to just blast people that they don't even know are armed. There is no excuse.

        I would like to see any situation where an average citizen could kill somebody in a similar manner and be given the benefit of the doubt. Because "He may or may not have been armed, I don't really know because I couldn't see" would not fly in any US court for any other random civilian.

account42 5 days ago

Neither is showing up to a bank with a gun. Yet a robbery is likely to have much more severe consequences if you are armed.

  • donkeybeer 3 days ago

    A banks not public property and the people being shot weren't engaging in any crime. A bank can decide what they allow in or not. Its extremely astounding you seem unaware of this. Your "analogy" is completely confused and meaningless.

    • kreetx 3 days ago

      The parent is just exemplifying how in specific situations having a gun with you drastically changes how you are perceived.

      • donkeybeer 3 days ago

        No, it's a completely absurd analogy that doesn't even begin to make sense.

  • kreetx 5 days ago

    It's funny how people use the lawfulness argument for carrying a gun to protest, but don't use the same argument against deporting illegals.

    • donkeybeer 3 days ago

      Nobody is stopping illegals from being deported. They just hace to prove illegality first. If you believe otherwise, I am more than happy to recommend you for imprisonment and deportation first before asking questions.

      • kreetx 3 days ago

        It's already proven as they are following through a court order.

        As far as I know, they are also first and foremost deporting illegals who are criminals to begin with.