5 ms·

The murder is definitely law enforcements fault. If they go in wanting to use deadly force without any proof that is on them. Of course the guys who made fals

by sontek 8y ago

The murder is definitely law enforcements fault. If they go in wanting to use deadly force without any proof that is on them. Of course the guys who made false claims should also be in trouble, but just because they were wrong, doesn't mean the law enforcement wasn't ALSO wrong.

matte_black 8y ago
Someone made a call saying someone was armed and dangerous and had already murdered at least one person. What more do you want? A picture? A video?
- timmaah 8y ago
  A conviction
- simlevesque 8y ago
  > What more do you want? A picture? A video? I want police officers to assess if there is any danger before shooting. The guy they shot was not even the guy who made the call, they had no proof that it was the same guy. I just want police officers to think about the current situation before shooting. If he had no weapon drawn, he was not a threat and there was no reason to shoot.
- keepper 8y ago
  Evidence? Rules of engagement that don't immediately mean an innocent person winds up dead? Can you honestly not see this?
- alkonaut 8y ago
  > What more do you want? A picture? A video? Direct observation of the threat. Period. > someone was armed and dangerous That's a rumor at that point (just like ANY call). They need to assess it themselves. Arriving at a scene and assuming anyone they see is this someone also seems pretty irresponsible.
- snowwrestler 8y ago
  In the U.S. military, operating in a foreign country, the typical orders under similar intelligence are to go and evaluate the situation themselves to determine if there is really a threat, before opening fire. It seems crazy to me that soldiers operating in a theater of war are held to a higher standard for use of lethal force than officers of the law interacting with U.S. citizens.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
    To be fair, they're given much, much superior training.
- ryanlol 8y ago
  So it'd be okay for the cops to shoot you if I made such a call to your address?
  - rhacker 8y ago
    Obviously not, but I would want you in jail for at least 30 years too.
romanovcode 8y ago
> should also be in trouble Should be charged with a murder. 25-life.
- AnaniasAnanas 8y ago
  I don't think that they should be charged with murder as they did not commit any actual murder themselves. That being said, I would consider it sane to give a sentence equivalent to murder to people who call a trigger-happy mongol horde (such as the law enforcement) in non-life-threatening (or similar) situations.
  - alkonaut 8y ago
    > I don't think that they should be charged with murder as they did not commit any actual murder themselves. This is why in many places the law makes it simple: solicitation/incitement carries the same sentence as the crime itself. Unsure if that's usually the case in the US.
    - 15155 8y ago
      It isn't, because this doctrine is often used to abridge the Freedom of Speech. Incitement of violence and other similar crimes are a very specific, tempered response.
  - romanovcode 8y ago
    > they should be charged with murder as they did not commit any actual murder themselves. So you're saying if one would order a hitman for 25k to hit someone and he executes it but police finds it out the person who ordered the hit should not be to blame? What's wrong with you?

by sontek 8y ago

matte_black 8y ago

Someone made a call saying someone was armed and dangerous and had already murdered at least one person. What more do you want? A picture? A video?

timmaah 8y ago
A conviction
simlevesque 8y ago
> What more do you want? A picture? A video? I want police officers to assess if there is any danger before shooting. The guy they shot was not even the guy who made the call, they had no proof that it was the same guy. I just want police officers to think about the current situation before shooting. If he had no weapon drawn, he was not a threat and there was no reason to shoot.
keepper 8y ago
Evidence? Rules of engagement that don't immediately mean an innocent person winds up dead? Can you honestly not see this?
alkonaut 8y ago
> What more do you want? A picture? A video? Direct observation of the threat. Period. > someone was armed and dangerous That's a rumor at that point (just like ANY call). They need to assess it themselves. Arriving at a scene and assuming anyone they see is this someone also seems pretty irresponsible.
snowwrestler 8y ago
In the U.S. military, operating in a foreign country, the typical orders under similar intelligence are to go and evaluate the situation themselves to determine if there is really a threat, before opening fire. It seems crazy to me that soldiers operating in a theater of war are held to a higher standard for use of lethal force than officers of the law interacting with U.S. citizens.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  To be fair, they're given much, much superior training.
ryanlol 8y ago
So it'd be okay for the cops to shoot you if I made such a call to your address?
- rhacker 8y ago
  Obviously not, but I would want you in jail for at least 30 years too.

romanovcode 8y ago

> should also be in trouble Should be charged with a murder. 25-life.

AnaniasAnanas 8y ago
I don't think that they should be charged with murder as they did not commit any actual murder themselves. That being said, I would consider it sane to give a sentence equivalent to murder to people who call a trigger-happy mongol horde (such as the law enforcement) in non-life-threatening (or similar) situations.
- alkonaut 8y ago
  > I don't think that they should be charged with murder as they did not commit any actual murder themselves. This is why in many places the law makes it simple: solicitation/incitement carries the same sentence as the crime itself. Unsure if that's usually the case in the US.
  - 15155 8y ago
    It isn't, because this doctrine is often used to abridge the Freedom of Speech. Incitement of violence and other similar crimes are a very specific, tempered response.
- romanovcode 8y ago
  > they should be charged with murder as they did not commit any actual murder themselves. So you're saying if one would order a hitman for 25k to hit someone and he executes it but police finds it out the person who ordered the hit should not be to blame? What's wrong with you?