4 ms·
The principal issue is: why was an unarmed man shot on his doorstep by the police. This focus conveniently absolves the police of wrong doing; e.g. "if someo
by clarkevans 9y ago
The principal issue is: why was an unarmed
man shot on his doorstep by the police.
This focus conveniently absolves the police
of wrong doing; e.g. "if someone didn't call
in a problem, no one would be dead".
- insickness 9y agoThe excuse used in this case what that it looked like he was pulling a gun from his waistband. It is conveniently difficult to disprove this unless his hands are already high in the air. So basically he was shot on sight.
- dekhn 9y agoOstensibly because he reached for his waistband instead of immediately putting up his hands.
- grafporno 9y agoHaving seen the video, it looked more like he was trying to shield his eyes from the light the police was shining directly at him _from across the street_. I don't know why this isn't reported more accurately, they shot the guy from what looks like a good 20-30 meters away.
- justherefortart 9y agoBecause they're already laying the groundwork that it was his fault, not the trigger happy cops.
- dekhn 9y agoRight, I said "ostensibly" above, but the cynic in me thinks, "the police got ahead of the narrative by saying he moved first". I don't really know what happened (other than a person got shot by the police when they absolutely should not have).
- MaxfordAndSons 9y agoYea, they wouldn't say that, because obviously it's not acceptable to shoot someone for moving their hands further up, but these days up is often down.