NY Trooper who fatally shot driver acted in self-defense

imported post

murdered for making a "illegal turn"

Click to expand...

Did you intentionally skip the part where he wrestled the baton from the trooper (I'm sure the cop didn't hand it to him politely) and "hit the trooper several times in the face and head"?

Or did youaccidentally miss that part?

The way you phrased it made it seem as ifhappy little Barracowas only delivering some cookies to poor Gramma when the big, bad ol' trooper "murdered" the poor guy in cold blood for having the misfortune of having his car jump the median of it's own volition.

Yeah. Stupid cop. What's he doing trying to pull people over for driving erratically?

murdered for making a "illegal turn"

Click to expand...

I'm guessing he was shot for committing a felony assault on a police officer with the officer's own baton.

Don't really see how you could get murdered for making an "illegal turn" out of it unless you completely missed the "hit the trooper several times in the face and head" thing.

Now that I've brought this to your attention, how would you explain it?

imported post

no i didn't miss any of it.

being a pirate is a dangerous job, some people don't like having their things stolen or being harassed or being threatened or victims of extortion scams... he took his anger out at the cop.

if we had peace officers, and not "leos" this guy would be alive, and nothing would've happened. he turned around on a street, and went over the curb doing it. so ******* what. i've done it before, lots of people have done it before.

bottom line, no cop around, no one gets hurt, no one dies, nothing is wrong, nothing happens... we have liberty...

cop around... you might get taxed or killed for doing someone that never hurt anyone but a small group of people decided they could extort money out of you for doing.

imported post

HankT wrote:

I carry a gun every day

Click to expand...

Maybe I missed a thread somewhere, but I think that's the first time I've ever heard you say you carry, Hank.

But since you won't admit where you actually live, I guess it makes no sense to ask you if and how you managed to get a New Jersey permit.

imported post

he got it by going, oink oink oink

imported post

Oh look, JonnyB is back......:banghead:

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

HankT wrote:

I carry a gun every day

Click to expand...

Maybe I missed a thread somewhere, but I think that's the first time I've ever heard you say you carry, Hank.

Click to expand...

Thawk, I've said it several times. But it does not surprise me that you wouldn't notice or remember it. Simplism is much more enticing for certain people....and I think you be one of dem....




Tomahawk wrote:

But since you won't admit where you actually live, I guess it makes no sense to ask you if and how you managed to get a New Jersey permit.

Click to expand...

Huh? What are you talking about? Make some sense, man.

You can do it, Thawk. Really, you can do it. But you have to think. You know, cogitate...

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

HankT wrote:

I carry a gun every day

Click to expand...

Maybe I missed a thread somewhere, but I think that's the first time I've ever heard you say you carry, Hank.

But since you won't admit where you actually live, I guess it makes no sense to ask you if and how you managed to get a New Jersey permit.

Click to expand...

You don't need a NJ permit if you're invisible. Though if you were invincible, you definitely would. Can't have an invincible law-abiding citizen taking down criminals... must keep them safe at all costs.

imported post

compmanio365 wrote:

Oh look, JonnyB is back......:banghead:

Click to expand...

i'm 357

imported post

OzarkMountainDaredevil wrote:

compmanio365 wrote:

Oh look, JonnyB is back......:banghead:

Click to expand...

i'm 357

Click to expand...

Really?

Are you really smoking357?

Care to show us some bombastic yet cheekycop-bashing to, uhm, kind of confirm it?

You know...... a little "It's Time to defend our brothers" kind of thang....

imported post

bottom line, no cop around, no one gets hurt, no one dies, nothing is wrong, nothing happens... we have liberty..

Click to expand...

This argument is childish.

It is the exact same thing as: If there were no guns, there wouldn't be bullets, no one gets shot, nothing is wrong, nothing happens... we have safety..

or

If there was no such thing as airplanes, there wouldn't be hijackings, no buildings get flown into, nothing is wrong, nothing happens...we don't have 9/11

or

If there was no such thing as money, there'd be no taxes, no one has to supportgovernment programs, nothing is wrong, nothinghappens...wehaveeternal happiness..

Well, there ARE cops, and guns, and airplanes, and money....get used to it.They'll probably be around for a little while.

Maybe a novel approach to not getting shot by police is DON'T ASSAULT THEM. To me, this is more rational than making them dissappear.

Unless, of course, you believe that laws shouldn't be enforced? If they shouldn't be enforced, what's the point of making any in the first place? No laws, right? After all, if you are against law enforcement, it logically follows you believelaws shouldn't be enforced, which begs the point that, if you're not going to enforce them, there's no point in making them in the first place.

But you can't pick and choose which ones, can you? You can't just say "we're not going to make this ONE law"....you would have to say "we're not going to make ANY laws." After all, if you aren't going tomake ONE particular law, you can'tmake ANY particular law. After all, the point in making ONE particular law would be to enforce it, right? But, you already said:

bottom line, no cop around, no one gets hurt, no one dies, nothing is wrong, nothing happens... we have liberty..

Click to expand...

...Soyou don't believe in enforcing laws. That's the only reason we have cops around.

So basically, murder, rape, robbery are just fine in your book. After all, there's no sense in enforcing laws, right?

The real bottom really is, no cop around, peopledo get hurt, many people die, nothing is wrong (no laws, right?) all kinds of bad things happen..you don't have liberty....you have anarchy.


BTW Hank: It must be 357. I don't know who else would be as irrationally anti-LEO and make that claim.

imported post

what are you so scared of superlite?

are you really that scared? how do you account for the safety, freedom, and liberty previous generations of americans have enjoyed without our current police state?

victims
murder = wrong
rape = wrong
robbery = wrong

no victims
turning around in a street over a curb = not wrong.

are you saying that the united states was in a state of anarchy for the first 200 years of its existence? we had peace officers, very few laws, very few criminals, lots of freedom, lots of liberty... so lets get this straight, you are saying the united states was in anarchy for most of its existence... got it...

your novel approach might work, if you ignore all the people who have been killed by "leos" when they DIDN'T assault them.

you shouldn't throw stones in a glass house... your argument is truly the childish one, you think that if there wasn't a law against turning around in a street we'd live in anarchy and everyone would die. and the true path to freedom is giving huge amounts of authority over to upper class citizens.

victimless crimes are unconstitutional. real crimes, the ones with victims, lets enforce those.

imported post

I grasp your argument, and it makes good sense.

You are basically defining your desire for enforcement on the difference between "malum prohibitum" and "malum in se" law.

Malum in se being inherently evil in itself, malum prohibitum being aganst the law because it's against the law.

While this makes good sense to me, I can't really see it as a justification for assaulting a police officer. This dog "just don't hunt".

Your argument is then with the actual reason for the original stop. This may have been baseless. Heck, the officer could have pulled him over for driving a blue car. I'm sure everyone will agree that the officer's actions would be baseless and unfounded on that one.

But the man wasn't shot based on this. He was shot based on his choice of actions. Instead of using the means a rational human being would use to argue his point (the same means we are using to approach our own disagreement here - verbal persuasion) he chose to assault the trooper. This action, not driving over the median, is the malum in se - evil in itself - action that he was mortally wounded for.

I'll agree with you all day long about the morality of driving a vehicle over a median. Heck, don't even get me started on speed limits (Why is going from point A to Point B at a specific velocity O.K., but going from point A to point B at a greater velocity suddenly bad?) or the worst yet - age discrimination (Why, if Joe Blow tries to buy a beer at 11:45 p.m. he's a criminal, but if he waits until his birthday arrives in 15 minutes, he's suddenly responsible enough to have a cold one?) but you can't extrapolate this guy's shooting into being the police officer's fault for being there.

If you use that argument, you could logically extrapolate it further and argue that it was Barraco's fault because he chose to drive down that particular street. But wait, you're right. It was the trooper's fault because he chose to go to work that night instead of staying home. No, wait. It was Barraco's fault because if hewouldhave walked instead of driven he wouldn't have been in a car to drive over the median in the first place........

...heck. Using this method of reverse blame, it could be their mother's fault for giving birth to either of them in the first place.

Or, can we just dispense with the nonsense and admit: If he wouldn't have struck the trooper, he'd probably still be alive?

imported post

i understand your point, but frankly i really don't care. maybe the guy had enough? he snapped, he was tired of pirates robbing him, who knows... but honestly, if you choose to be a pirate, if you choose to enforce laws that are unconstitutional... i have no sympathy. stealing money and harassing people who haven't done anything is a dangerous job.

IMO the cop deserved a beat down.

i think its far worse all the hardships involved with our police state... compared to getting beat up once... what i'm trying to say is the cop has caused 10000000x more pain to so many people "doing his job" than he suffered getting beat up once.

a person in their right mind would not attack a cop because they got pulled over, this guy wasn't in his right mind... but that doesn't excuse the actions of the cop... and our government which might have made this guy that way.

there have been hundreds of thousands of people in the united states killed by cops... unarmed, completely innocent... etc...

our country was more free and much more safe in past times, because people were allowed to defend themselves, they did not rely on government for protection.

Our people gave up liberty for fake safety, and have neither.

we are not free, we have very little liberty, and we certainly are not safe from out government or people people.

imported post

OzarkMountainDaredevil wrote

IMO the cop deserved a beat down.

i think its far worse all the hardships involved with our police state... compared to getting beat up once... what i'm trying to say is the cop has caused 10000000x more pain to so many people "doing his job" than he suffered getting beat up once.

Click to expand...

Wow, what little respect I used to have for you, simply for being a human being, has completely vanished from existence. If you really are smoking357, which at this point I must be inclined to believe because of your blatant malice toward police officers, then you truly are a tool among tools.

Do you honestly believe the hate you are spouting? Do you really think that police officer deserved to get his face beaten by a large wooden club? If so, then may God have mercy on your soul, sir.

And can you cite any statistics that support your claim that
"there have been hundreds of thousands of people in the united states killed by cops... unarmed, completely innocent... etc..."?

imported post

use google.

you are a cop? do you work for the government in some fashion? do your relatives? etc...?

a simple cop during the course of his career can cause an ungodly and disturbing amount of hardship to people who have never hurt anyone else.

there are so many situations i could list them out over and over and over.

think of a man who can't afford automobile insurance but the government thats just trying to help him mandates it, he gets pulled over driving to work cause his license plate light bulb burnt out. now his car get towed by the company that is in bed with his local fascist government... he can't pay to get his car, can't go to work, the company puts a lien on it and steals his car.

all for having a bulb thats burnt out and not being able to afford to buy into the fascist insurance scam business?

this is a single example... one cop could do something like this several times a day... how many lives are they ruining? how much pain are they really inflicting on innocent people?

weak men cry out for government.

government is a necessary evil that has to be as small and powerless as possible.

imported post

I used google before I posted the last comment, but could find no such statistics to defend your flagrant assertion. I wanted to see if you could provide them, because you seem to honestly believe that they are true.

Instead of hundreds of thousands, try on the order of less than 500 per year.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/justify.htm

And no, I'm not a LEO, however I have many friends and respected mentors who are, and I abhor your unfounded attacks on their livelihood and the services they provide to their communities. Without police officers, this country would be a complete disaster - ruled by local gang lords, or whoever has the most money. And before you go telling me that you could "hold your own", just think about how much good your little handgun would do (if you even own one) against a mob of gang bangers with far superior firepower and numbers.

I don't believe in big government, but I do believe in some government. Most things that government now control can be done better by the private sector, however public safety is not one of them. We need an organized, well-funded police force to protect the community and uphold the laws so that ordinary citizens don't have to. That isn't to say that ordinary citizens aren't responsible for their own safety - quite the opposite - I believe every person is responsible for their own safety, however police make it that much easier to do that.

My hat is off to the brave men and women who get paid scraps to uphold peace in their communities.

imported post

Kenosis wrote:

I used google before I posted the last comment, but could find no such statistics to defend your flagrant assertion. I wanted to see if you could provide them, because you seem to honestly believe that they are true.

Instead of hundreds of thousands, try on the order of less than 500 per year.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/justify.htm

And no, I'm not a LEO, however I have many friends and respected mentors who are, and I abhor your unfounded attacks on their livelihood and the services they provide to their communities. Without police officers, this country would be a complete disaster - ruled by local gang lords, or whoever has the most money. And before you go telling me that you could "hold your own", just think about how much good your little handgun would do (if you even own one) against a mob of gang bangers with far superior firepower and numbers.

I don't believe in big government, but I do believe in some government. Most things that government now control can be done better by the private sector, however public safety is not one of them. We need an organized, well-funded police force to protect the community and uphold the laws so that ordinary citizens don't have to. That isn't to say that ordinary citizens aren't responsible for their own safety - quite the opposite - I believe every person is responsible for their own safety, however police make it that much easier to do that.

My hat is off to the brave men and women who get paid scraps to uphold peace in their communities.

Click to expand...

ok i edited most of my post, i've learned you can't argue against weak men who worship authority figures.

i'll keep it simple

Ask some random people if they feel safe or nervous when a LEO pulls behind them? There is your answer...

please... at least attempt to answer this.

"how do you account for the safety, freedom, and liberty previous generations of americans have enjoyed without our current police state?"

imported post

buster81 wrote: exactly, no argument, only emotions... just like a liberal, except you want the freedom to carry a gun... but no freedom for anyone else!

imported post

I think 357 has some good points.

We could go back to a common law system where there has to be a victim for there to be a crime. And if someone decides to be an outlaw that is fine but the court won't protect them if they become a victim in the future.

And by doing that we could remove most of thelaws from the books. And it wouldn't cause anarchy.