Where did you get the child rape bit from? The guy had a big record alright but that part seems to have been fact checked and proved false
You win on this one, it's mostly hear say on the age... The warrant is 3rd degree sexual assault which includes rape and a maximum sentence of 40 years
Its not "mostly hearsay", its false.
I'm not looking to 'win' anything & this guy had a big record, just highlighting the hypocrisy- you want to disbelieve & slate the media when it suits you ("its not Trump, its the media"), but then believe & use the media when it suits you ("he is a child rapist").
He's a man up for sexual assault ..end of story
Would you be ok if this had happened in England?
You won’t find a language barrier with the majority of their populations, most people under 50 speak good English and a lot over 50 also. They’re also always happy to speak it. Depends on how far north you go in Scandinavia regarding the weather. I’ve been to Denmark numerous times and at different times of the year and it ain’t that different to most of the U.K. I’d actually say (opinion not fact) that it’s dryer given the British Isles take the brunt of the Gulf Stream. When it snows in Denmark it doesn’t mess around though, it snows. They’re well prepared for it though.If we take out language barriers etc if it weren't for the cold,dark winters any of the Scandi countries ta very much.
Don't know, different country, different culture...
I'm always happy for police to shoot to kill in the event of their life being endangered though
Even in the UK
Their lives were clearly not endangered
You have absolutely no idea that this is true
They shot him in the back 7 times while he was opening a car door. Impressive that he could be endangering lives while not looking & with one hand out of action, no?
Reaching for a gun /knife? Maybe... Like most of the protestors and the Go fund me woke mob... You should wait for the facts yourself
Reaching for a gun /knife? Maybe... Like most of the protestors and the Go fund me woke mob... You should wait for the facts yourself
The fact is they shot someone in the back 7 times at distance.
They are not allowed to shoot unless their is a threat to their lives which they could not know that that time.
Like most of the gammon wankers you should stick to facts
Whats your view on Kyle Rittenhouse?
He was standing behind him trying to ull him back from the car... The distance is inches close enough to be turned on and stabbed Infact or even shot... Facts are you're defending a career criminal who had a warrant on him for sexual assault... Whose the wanker defending him? Not me mate
No he's not, its about defending him, its about asking why the fuck the police are shooting people 7 times in the back
Have you ever been in a situation where you need to decide what the correct thing to do is in an instant? In terms of life and death? You have no idea
I'm not trained to have to do that
The police are. And they still decided to shoot the guy 7 times
Our police do quite an effective job without doing that, on the whole...I'm not trained to have to do that
The police are. And they still decided to shoot the guy 7 times
Comply? Quite simple... The moment you lean into your car whilst trying to be restrained is the moment you become a threat, in a part of America where you can carry guns.... No risks taken... Youre going down my friend
Even if the guy is a criminal and was wanted its not an excuse to kill him. The US police aren't Judge Dredd.
If the police can't arrest someone without killing them in the numbers we are seeing in the US then clearly there is either something wrong with the training & procedures or the recruitment.
Do you think the officer involved waited for the facts to come out?Reaching for a gun /knife? Maybe... Like most of the protestors and the Go fund me woke mob... You should wait for the facts yourself
7 bullets- you can't answer, you have no response to justify it. I could understand 1 of course, maybe 2, but 7? Who was this guy they were trying to arrest, Thanos?
Do you think the officer involved waited for the facts to come out?
His job is to react to the situation, restraint failed, taser failed, leaned into his car whilst being pulled back... Youre getting shot
7 times?
How many times should he have shot him?
Completely incomparible though when you Compare culturesOur police do quite an effective job without doing that, on the whole...
lol, stop with the whataboutery. You tell me, you're squirming & you're the one with the bloodlust here, tell me- when he'd been shot in the spine and paralysed- do you agree they were justified to keep shooting?
Once, in the leg. Doubtful it needed more than that. Unless he was intending on killing him.I'm not squirming whatsoever, you say 7 is too many how many times should that officer in that incident have shot the suspect if he feared his life was in danger... You tell me because 7 is too many so what's acceptable
Obviously the expert in situations like this please afford me your expertise
Once, in the leg. Doubtful it needed more than that. Unless he was intending on killing him.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?