-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
The MURDER of Timothy Mitchell
- Thread starter The Truth
- Start date
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
His comment was just trying to be sensational, and instead came off as stupid.
Ouch! Biotch Slap!:lol:
The correct terminology is homicide. Homicide is called murder, if it's determined to that it wasn't justified. If it was justified, then it's called, "justifiable homicide."
I thought it was called "officer safety".
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
I can only hope that it does indeed get stale.
Glad to see you on Al! Boom boy lives in my town now and is a good friend he speaks very highly of you.
Big Gay Al
Michigan Moderator
Big Gay Al
Michigan Moderator
I have got to stop those good rumours about me. Other wise, I'll lose my bad boy rep.
Sticks and stones may break your bones, but rumors never hurt thee.I have got to stop those good rumours about me. Other wise, I'll lose my bad boy rep.
I always figured if they were talking about me then they were leaving someone else alone
Scooter123
Regular Member
So, where in the Constitution does it say that Law Enforcement does not have the right to defend themselves against Assault. I don't care if the guy was drunk, it still doesn't excuse his aggressive stance and his advancing on that officer. I'm not a cop and if someone were coming at me in a menacing manner and telling me I'd have to shoot him to stop him I would do exactly that. Yeah, the quality of the video is awful, but it is revealing enough to reveal a Hunched Shoulder Approach and since this a classic posture for Aggression it's rather likely this person also had his fists clenched. So, if I'm on a jury for a Civil or Criminal action against this officer I will vote to Acquit that officer of any and ALL negative consequences.
There is a very simply method for keeping yourself from being shot by an LEO. That is to do exactly what you are told to do and nothing more. If you don't like being arrested or detained then the time to address that is in Court, not on the side of the road.
Wise words.
Cite to the claim that LEO cannot Constitutionally defend themselves please.
Sorry, but if you're a young, strong, spry buck like myself, drawing my sidearm is not my first move if a guy is coming at me with shoulder lowered. There's no need to kill someone just because they've got a big mouth and wish to engage in fisticuffs. If I were LEO I would hold myself to an even higher such standard, but as everything goes in life, people will push the limits of "what is allowed." I just so happen to value human life maybe a little more than the next guy.
As for fighting the law on the side of the road, perhaps I've not communicated properly how I personally handle situations with LEO. I agree with you and I have personally never had a negative interaction with LEO.
Last edited:
twoskinsonemanns
Regular Member
You mistake need with opportunity. Sure for a common reasonable person shooting someone to death is not desired and would be a last resort to save yourself or loved ones. The guy was being aggressive and that gave the cop the opportunity to blow him away. Legally justified. Sadistically fulfilling. You just don't understand.
FreeInAZ
Regular Member
Well one things for sure. Both parties had ample opportunity to bring it down a bit. The cop could have done many things different, after all he was the trained professional on site.
The citizen could have simply sat down on the side of the road and hoped he wouldn't have been shot. Like I said both made mistakes in my opinion.
The citizen could have simply sat down on the side of the road and hoped he wouldn't have been shot. Like I said both made mistakes in my opinion.
budlight
Regular Member
Based on the suspects prior actions to the encounter, his approach and verbal comments to the officer, I see no need for this officer to roll the dice and try to play Mr. Nice Guy. The suspect got everything he asked for and deserved. I'm really confused as to why anybody really cares as the video alone speaks for itself.
On a side note I think it's time a moderator closes this thread as there will be end to it.
:lol: But it is so good to go to one thread and finding everyone talking about the same thing. :lol:
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
I agree, IMO the suspect did not leave the officer with much choice. This is why there should be dash cam, as well as lapel cam, it protects the officer as much as it protects the citizen. I don't understand why the unions are balking at the idea.
Right...close the thread effectively censoring dissent because it does not fit your point of view. Sounds fair!
JoeSparky
Centurion
Oh, for the day when a "mere" person is judged in the same manner as many LEO's seem to be!
FreeInAZ
Regular Member
I have to agree. When we mere mortals are given the same "courtesies" of the legal system that "peace officers" get; I think we'd be better off in that regard. But I digress, we are outsiders, we should know to expect little from the insiders even though we "technically" own the system. That is if you consider the constitution a technicality as many in power do.
Off rant! Sorry fellow choir members for preaching to you.
davidmcbeth
Banned
Because without the cameras more boarder line cases always go in favor of their members? Unions have no obligation to the public. Its a reason why I oppose public employee unions.
Last edited: