kal kommie said:

---

oski003 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

oski003 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Wow

The cops thought the guy (whose back was turned to them) had a gun. In reality it was an “L-shaped butane lighter.”

I spent weeks trying to get Chief Moore to release pictures of the “L-shaped butane lighter” but he refused until they reached the 45 day requirement. pic.twitter.com/El58YbDewi

— Film The Police LA (@FilmThePoliceLA) September 19, 2022

---

Why are people running from the cops holding black L shaped butane lighters that look like guns? ***?

---

Did you even watch the video? These guys weren't running from the cops, they were just getting out of their car and walking into their house. They had no idea what was about to happen.

---

100% positive they ran from the cops. What drug are you on?

---

How are you 100% positive? Did you see another video or news report that said they had fled from the cops?

Did you even watch the linked video?

---

oski003 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

oski003 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

oski003 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Wow

The cops thought the guy (whose back was turned to them) had a gun. In reality it was an “L-shaped butane lighter.”

I spent weeks trying to get Chief Moore to release pictures of the “L-shaped butane lighter” but he refused until they reached the 45 day requirement. pic.twitter.com/El58YbDewi

— Film The Police LA (@FilmThePoliceLA) September 19, 2022

---

Why are people running from the cops holding black L shaped butane lighters that look like guns? ***?

---

Did you even watch the video? These guys weren't running from the cops, they were just getting out of their car and walking into their house. They had no idea what was about to happen.

---

100% positive they ran from the cops. What drug are you on?

---

How are you 100% positive? Did you see another video or news report that said they had fled from the cops?

Did you even watch the linked video?

---

I am 100% positive because I watched the video, and I am not on drugs.

---

going4roses said:

---

Drug of choice = White depravity

---

kal kommie said:

---

oski003 said:

---

going4roses said:

---

Drug of choice = White depravity

---

This has zero to do with white depravity and everything to do with a guy turning away from the cops, while ducking into a house carrying an object that looked a lot like a gun. I am curious what the backstory is here. I believe the police officer reasonably thought an armed suspect was fleeing from him into a house.

---

They aren't "ducking". The driver exhibits no knowledge that the cops have anything to do with him when he gets out of his truck. He looks at the cop car as it rolls down the street for two seconds, casually turns to walk inside his house, turns his head (only) back as the cop car heads towards him and the cops instantly open fire. Then he says "***?!?" and they flee inside. Neither he nor his passenger show any urgency at all in getting into the house until the cops open fire.

These guys were not fleeing (until they were shot at) and regardless the gang-land style shooting by the officers is absurdly reckless. How can the cop identify the object the driver is holding as a gun from a bad angle in a moving car 20 ft away? What kind of accuracy can be expected while shooting out the window of a moving car on a residential street? What is the target of the shooting doing that fulfills the requirement that the use of deadly force is authorized only in response to an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm to another person? Absolute worst case scenario he would have been "ducking" into his house with a gun in his hand (of course he was neither fleeing nor hand a gun). That justifies this gang-banger style shooting?

Your cognitive dissonance here is really unbelievable. It speaks to how strong your need is to back the police no matter what.

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

In a city where cops have shown themselves to be criminals attacking people of color for decades, they certainly haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.

g4r is absolutely on the money here. Any defense of these horrible cops that doesn't acknowledge the history of the LAPD tells us more about the defender than it does about the situation. Same defense we initially saw for the Arbery murderers.

And of course, zero surprise about the particular contrarian who is blindlessly offering up circumstances (which he doesn't even believe) to justify this ridiculous shooting.

---

kal kommie said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

In a city where cops have shown themselves to be criminals attacking people of color for decades, they certainly haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.

g4r is absolutely on the money here. Any defense of these horrible cops that doesn't acknowledge the history of the LAPD tells us more about the defender than it does about the situation. Same defense we initially saw for the Arbery murderers.

And of course, zero surprise about the particular contrarian who is blindlessly offering up circumstances (which he doesn't even believe) to justify this ridiculous shooting.

---

It is because you are too stupidly biased to realize that the guy turned away, and walked away from the cops while carrying an object that looked like a gun. I am acknowledging the cops perspective and pointing out how poor the behavior is of the individual who was shot at. You and kommie are both too stupidly biased to realize this and create a victim narrative that absolves people from their poor behavior towards the police. You then take anyone pointing out circumstances that demonstrate the perspective of the officer and call them racists or blind contrarians.

Nowhere did I ever say that this shooting was justified. But, because you crusade on the side of the good wokeness, anyone who pierced your woke veil, is considered by people with your views to be a blind cop supporter or racist. Reality is more nuanced than that. Not being partisan is not a contrarian viewpoint. I call it how it is.

---

Poor behavior? What the f*** are you talking about? The guy got out of his car, saw a cop car coming up the street, looked at it for two seconds, turned to walk inside his house, turned his head back when the cop car came toward him and was instantly shot at. What would have been good behavior? To assume whenever he sees a cop car that it's coming for him, drop everything and lie on the floor?

You did try to justify this shooing from the very start by claiming "100%" that these guys were in fact running away from the police before they were fired upon. You tried to put the blame on them for their intentional actions. And you're still trying to offer justification for it now by blaming the supposedly poor behavior of the guy who almost got shot.

How would you have any idea what reality is like when you clearly don't live in it? It's actually scary how warped your mind is here. Scary because I know you're not alone. Every time a heinous police shooting comes up there are always deranged mother f*ckers like you who are ready to take up the cops' side like you're their court appointed defender zealously observing the canonical requirement to give them a vigorous defense no matter how undeserving they are.

How the hell did this happen to you? How did your mind get this broken? ****ing hell

---

kal kommie said:

---

oski003 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

In a city where cops have shown themselves to be criminals attacking people of color for decades, they certainly haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.

g4r is absolutely on the money here. Any defense of these horrible cops that doesn't acknowledge the history of the LAPD tells us more about the defender than it does about the situation. Same defense we initially saw for the Arbery murderers.

And of course, zero surprise about the particular contrarian who is blindlessly offering up circumstances (which he doesn't even believe) to justify this ridiculous shooting.

---

It is because you are too stupidly biased to realize that the guy turned away, and walked away from the cops while carrying an object that looked like a gun. I am acknowledging the cops perspective and pointing out how poor the behavior is of the individual who was shot at. You and kommie are both too stupidly biased to realize this and create a victim narrative that absolves people from their poor behavior towards the police. You then take anyone pointing out circumstances that demonstrate the perspective of the officer and call them racists or blind contrarians.

Nowhere did I ever say that this shooting was justified. But, because you crusade on the side of the good wokeness, anyone who pierced your woke veil, is considered by people with your views to be a blind cop supporter or racist. Reality is more nuanced than that. Not being partisan is not a contrarian viewpoint. I call it how it is.

---

Poor behavior? What the f*** are you talking about? The guy got out of his car, saw a cop car coming up the street, looked at it for two seconds, turned to walk inside his house, turned his head back when the cop car came toward him and was instantly shot at. What would have been good behavior? To assume whenever he sees a cop car that it's coming for him, drop everything and lie on the floor?

You did try to justify this shooing from the very start by claiming "100%" that these guys were in fact running away from the police before they were fired upon. You tried to put the blame on them for their intentional actions. And you're still trying to offer justification for it now by blaming the supposedly poor behavior of the guy who almost got shot.

How would you have any idea what reality is like when you clearly don't live in it? It's actually scary how warped your mind is here. Scary because I know you're not alone. Every time a heinous police shooting comes up there are always deranged mother f*ckers like you who are ready to take up the cops' side like you're their court appointed defender zealously observing the canonical requirement to give them a vigorous defense no matter how undeserving they are.

How the hell did this happen to you? How did your mind get this broken? ****ing hell

---

How did your mind get so broken that you think, when you see patrolling cops, turning away and ducking into a house with a black L shaped lighter held like and looking like a gun is not poor, stupid behavior.

Take off your broken Commie, cop-hating lense and look at the clip at 20 or 21 seconds. What a dumb moron.

Every time a police shooting comes up there are always deranged mother f*ckers like you who portray police in the worst possible way and don't acknowledge basic facts, such as someone looking like they are holding a handgun. Deranged mother f*ckers like you further think that pointing out these facts is zealously defending or justifying a cops behavior. There are mitigating circumstances for both cops and criminals. Here, it very much looked like the dude was running into a house holding a handgun with his hand on the trigger. Acknowledging this fact doesn't mean I am saying it is good or proper police work.

---

For the nth time, these guys were not "ducking" into their house. They exited their car and walked toward their door as normal. The driver reacted to the sight of the cop car driving up his street in precisely the same manner I would have. "Oh, a cop car." And then go about my business. Only in a deranged mind like yours was this guy's behavior poor in any way. They did absolutely nothing wrong and the cop is 100% at fault for an unbelievably poor use of deadly force.

The absurd bias you've carried into the conversation can be most easily demonstrated by your initial claim, twice repeated, that these guys were "100%" intentionally running away from the cops before the cops opened fire. So certain are you that this is obviously true that you say I'd have to be on drugs to disagree. You seemingly abandoned this position for a few posts and now it seems like you're caught in-between knowing how stupid this claim was and still needing to disparage the behavior of the intended shooting victim in some way so you insert insinuating characterizations like "ducking" into your recount of the incident.

But at the end of this latest idiotic offering of yours, "ducking" has been replaced by "running" because "ducking" just didn't warp reality enough to serve your rhetorical needs. Please seek help for your delusions. Based on what I've seen, it's probably too late but you never know. It's worth a shot.

---

going4roses said:

---

At this rate law enforcement is virtually infallible… practically never ever wrong no matter what the actual evidence shows.

You and that mindset(social construct) is the exact reason Critical Legal Studies had to be become a thing because "in order to get a person to support a policy you must first wind the mind "

https://www.encyclopedia.com/law/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/critical-legal-studies

https://open.mitchellhamline.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2501&context=wmlr
" First, I have long had a burning interest in identifying transformative legal analyses that will usher in a more just American society. Starting with my early days as a "Reggie Fellow" in legal services, I have maintained an inter- est in "leftist radical theories" that could play a positive role in the human struggle of all persons, but that would especially alleviate the suffering by persons of color. I hope to uncover analyses that will provide further theoretical foundations for carrying on the pioneer civil rights work of W.E.B., DuBois, Charles Hamilton Houston, Thurgood Marshall, Derrick Bell and others."

---

kal kommie said:

---

oski003 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

In a city where cops have shown themselves to be criminals attacking people of color for decades, they certainly haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.

g4r is absolutely on the money here. Any defense of these horrible cops that doesn't acknowledge the history of the LAPD tells us more about the defender than it does about the situation. Same defense we initially saw for the Arbery murderers.

And of course, zero surprise about the particular contrarian who is blindlessly offering up circumstances (which he doesn't even believe) to justify this ridiculous shooting.

---

It is because you are too stupidly biased to realize that the guy turned away, and walked away from the cops while carrying an object that looked like a gun. I am acknowledging the cops perspective and pointing out how poor the behavior is of the individual who was shot at. You and kommie are both too stupidly biased to realize this and create a victim narrative that absolves people from their poor behavior towards the police. You then take anyone pointing out circumstances that demonstrate the perspective of the officer and call them racists or blind contrarians.

Nowhere did I ever say that this shooting was justified. But, because you crusade on the side of the good wokeness, anyone who pierced your woke veil, is considered by people with your views to be a blind cop supporter or racist. Reality is more nuanced than that. Not being partisan is not a contrarian viewpoint. I call it how it is.

---

Poor behavior? What the f*** are you talking about? The guy got out of his car, saw a cop car coming up the street, looked at it for two seconds, turned to walk inside his house, turned his head back when the cop car came toward him and was instantly shot at. What would have been good behavior? To assume whenever he sees a cop car that it's coming for him, drop everything and lie on the floor?

You did try to justify this shooing from the very start by claiming "100%" that these guys were in fact running away from the police before they were fired upon. You tried to put the blame on them for their intentional actions. And you're still trying to offer justification for it now by blaming the supposedly poor behavior of the guy who almost got shot.

How would you have any idea what reality is like when you clearly don't live in it? It's actually scary how warped your mind is here. Scary because I know you're not alone. Every time a heinous police shooting comes up there are always deranged mother f*ckers like you who are ready to take up the cops' side like you're their court appointed defender zealously observing the canonical requirement to give them a vigorous defense no matter how undeserving they are.

How the hell did this happen to you? How did your mind get this broken? ****ing hell

---

How did your mind get so broken that you think, when you see patrolling cops, turning away and ducking into a house with a black L shaped lighter held like and looking like a gun is not poor, stupid behavior.

Take off your broken Commie, cop-hating lense and look at the clip at 20 or 21 seconds. What a dumb moron.

Every time a police shooting comes up there are always deranged mother f*ckers like you who portray police in the worst possible way and don't acknowledge basic facts, such as someone looking like they are holding a handgun. Deranged mother f*ckers like you further think that pointing out these facts is zealously defending or justifying a cops behavior. There are mitigating circumstances for both cops and criminals. Here, it very much looked like the dude was running into a house holding a handgun with his hand on the trigger. Acknowledging this fact doesn't mean I am saying it is good or proper police work.

---

For the nth time, these guys were not "ducking" into their house. They exited their car and walked toward their door as normal. The driver reacted to the sight of the cop car driving up his street in precisely the same manner I would have. "Oh, a cop car." And then go about my business. Only in a deranged mind like yours was this guy's behavior poor in any way. They did absolutely nothing wrong and the cop is 100% at fault for an unbelievably poor use of deadly force.

The absurd bias you've carried into the conversation can be most easily demonstrated by your initial claim, twice repeated, that these guys were "100%" intentionally running away from the cops before the cops opened fire. So certain are you that this is obviously true that you say I'd have to be on drugs to disagree. You seemingly abandoned this position for a few posts and now it seems like you're caught in-between knowing how stupid this claim was and still needing to disparage the behavior of the intended shooting victim in some way so you insert insinuating characterizations like "ducking" into your recount of the incident.

But at the end of this latest idiotic offering of yours, "ducking" has been replaced by "running" because "ducking" just didn't warp reality enough to serve your rhetorical needs. Please seek help for your delusions. Based on what I've seen, it's probably too late but you never know. It's worth a shot.

---

going4roses said:

---

At this rate law enforcement is virtually infallible… practically never ever wrong no matter what the actual evidence shows.

You and that mindset(social construct) is the exact reason Critical Legal Studies had to be become a thing because "in order to get a person to support a policy you must first wind the mind "

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

going4roses said:

---

At this rate law enforcement is virtually infallible… practically never ever wrong no matter what the actual evidence shows.

You and that mindset(social construct) is the exact reason Critical Legal Studies had to be become a thing because "in order to get a person to support a policy you must first wind the mind "

---

This is exactly right. The starting point (even with corrupt and blundering LAPD) is that the cops are always right. They're shooting at a black guy so the black guy must be a criminal. This was an obviously bad shoot - there was no reason to wantonly fire a weapon. Even if what 003 is saying is true you don't need to fire a weapon. That's why 003 both defends unconditionally and then follows up at the end by acknowledging that it was poor police work.

If I'm a black guy and I see the police speeding toward me with guns blazing of course I fooking run for cover. Look at the girl who gets out of the car to save herself. This is just human survival instinct. There is no way in h=ll that 003 sees cops shooting at him for no reason and walks into gunfire with his hands up. One of the dumbest propositions I've ever heard is to think that any rational person would act differently than the shooting victims here - they did what any other people would do, move to safety in the face of gunfire. 003 is just doing his normal braindead contrarian thing and his opinion should be disregarded entirely as not reflective of any reality we live in.

---

AunBear89 said:

---

Performative nonsense from a dishonest contributor who thinks he is infallible.

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

going4roses said:

---

At this rate law enforcement is virtually infallible… practically never ever wrong no matter what the actual evidence shows.

You and that mindset(social construct) is the exact reason Critical Legal Studies had to be become a thing because "in order to get a person to support a policy you must first wind the mind "

---

This is exactly right. The starting point (even with corrupt and blundering LAPD) is that the cops are always right. They're shooting at a black guy so the black guy must be a criminal. This was an obviously bad shoot - there was no reason to wantonly fire a weapon. Even if what 003 is saying is true you don't need to fire a weapon. That's why 003 both defends unconditionally and then follows up at the end by acknowledging that it was poor police work.

If I'm a black guy and I see the police speeding toward me with guns blazing of course I fooking run for cover. Look at the girl who gets out of the car to save herself. This is just human survival instinct. There is no way in h=ll that 003 sees cops shooting at him for no reason and walks into gunfire with his hands up. One of the dumbest propositions I've ever heard is to think that any rational person would act differently than the shooting victims here - they did what any other people would do, move to safety in the face of gunfire. 003 is just doing his normal braindead contrarian thing and his opinion should be disregarded entirely as not reflective of any reality we live in.

---

003 does not defend unconditionally. Wrong again, doing your braindead woke crap. I live much closer to this reality than you realize. I hope my kids aren't thinking as stupidly as you are here. I demand better behavior than almost all the people in these videos. In trying to balance kommie's one-sided paragraphs, I never once said the cops should have shot at the person. You fail here buddy.

---

I acknowledge that after inventing any number of baseless defenses for the bad cops, you have repeatedly said that you aren't "saying it's good or proper police work".

But what is your goal here? Are you really teaching your kids that when they are walking into their home and face a hail of gunfire that they should turn around and walk toward danger? If so, you would be the only person on the planet to do so. The victims of this senseless gunfire did what they should have done.

Contrarian nonsense and not reflective of any shared reality.

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

going4roses said:

---

At this rate law enforcement is virtually infallible… practically never ever wrong no matter what the actual evidence shows.

You and that mindset(social construct) is the exact reason Critical Legal Studies had to be become a thing because "in order to get a person to support a policy you must first wind the mind "

---

This is exactly right. The starting point (even with corrupt and blundering LAPD) is that the cops are always right. They're shooting at a black guy so the black guy must be a criminal. This was an obviously bad shoot - there was no reason to wantonly fire a weapon. Even if what 003 is saying is true you don't need to fire a weapon. That's why 003 both defends unconditionally and then follows up at the end by acknowledging that it was poor police work.

If I'm a black guy and I see the police speeding toward me with guns blazing of course I fooking run for cover. Look at the girl who gets out of the car to save herself. This is just human survival instinct. There is no way in h=ll that 003 sees cops shooting at him for no reason and walks into gunfire with his hands up. One of the dumbest propositions I've ever heard is to think that any rational person would act differently than the shooting victims here - they did what any other people would do, move to safety in the face of gunfire. 003 is just doing his normal braindead contrarian thing and his opinion should be disregarded entirely as not reflective of any reality we live in.

---

003 does not defend unconditionally. Wrong again, doing your braindead woke crap. I live much closer to this reality than you realize. I hope my kids aren't thinking as stupidly as you are here. I demand better behavior than almost all the people in these videos. In trying to balance kommie's one-sided paragraphs, I never once said the cops should have shot at the person. You fail here buddy.

---

I acknowledge that after inventing any number of baseless defenses for the bad cops, you have repeatedly said that you aren't "saying it's good or proper police work".

But what is your goal here? Are you really teaching your kids that when they are walking into their home and face a hail of gunfire that they should turn around and walk toward danger? If so, you would be the only person on the planet to do so. The victims of this senseless gunfire did what they should have done.

Contrarian nonsense and not reflective of any shared reality.

---

I would teach my kids to respect, be aware of, and acknowledge the police. 99% of them are there to keep all of us safe. I definitely would not want them to turn away from the police while holding an object that looked like a handgun as if it were a handgun. I haven't really focused at all on the lady running, as you are well aware. I know you can't help it, but please don't conjure other people's arguments. Have some integrity.

If what I posted about an occupant of the car being a wanted gang member is true, it blows Kommie's entire narrative out of the sky. It should certainly better explain the actions of the car's occupants.

---

You aren't very familiar with the constitution if you think that police can perform drive-by executions on "wanged gang members".

You continue to fail to acknowledge basic human behaviors, which is what we saw here. Even if the victims of gunfire here had just committed a murder, there would be no reason for the police to perform a drive-by shooting. That's just not allowable under any constitutional framework.

Police forces, particularly the LAPD, have perpetrated violence like this against communities of color for decades (more really). That's why so many are distrustful of police and why a person minding his own damn business wouldn't think to run toward police who have opened fire.

Honestly, I can't believe you are continuing to claim otherwise. You think anyone in their right fooking mind would hear gunshots (whatever the origin) and present themselves as a better target?

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

going4roses said:

---

At this rate law enforcement is virtually infallible… practically never ever wrong no matter what the actual evidence shows.

You and that mindset(social construct) is the exact reason Critical Legal Studies had to be become a thing because "in order to get a person to support a policy you must first wind the mind "

---

This is exactly right. The starting point (even with corrupt and blundering LAPD) is that the cops are always right. They're shooting at a black guy so the black guy must be a criminal. This was an obviously bad shoot - there was no reason to wantonly fire a weapon. Even if what 003 is saying is true you don't need to fire a weapon. That's why 003 both defends unconditionally and then follows up at the end by acknowledging that it was poor police work.

If I'm a black guy and I see the police speeding toward me with guns blazing of course I fooking run for cover. Look at the girl who gets out of the car to save herself. This is just human survival instinct. There is no way in h=ll that 003 sees cops shooting at him for no reason and walks into gunfire with his hands up. One of the dumbest propositions I've ever heard is to think that any rational person would act differently than the shooting victims here - they did what any other people would do, move to safety in the face of gunfire. 003 is just doing his normal braindead contrarian thing and his opinion should be disregarded entirely as not reflective of any reality we live in.

---

003 does not defend unconditionally. Wrong again, doing your braindead woke crap. I live much closer to this reality than you realize. I hope my kids aren't thinking as stupidly as you are here. I demand better behavior than almost all the people in these videos. In trying to balance kommie's one-sided paragraphs, I never once said the cops should have shot at the person. You fail here buddy.

---

I acknowledge that after inventing any number of baseless defenses for the bad cops, you have repeatedly said that you aren't "saying it's good or proper police work".

But what is your goal here? Are you really teaching your kids that when they are walking into their home and face a hail of gunfire that they should turn around and walk toward danger? If so, you would be the only person on the planet to do so. The victims of this senseless gunfire did what they should have done.

Contrarian nonsense and not reflective of any shared reality.

---

I would teach my kids to respect, be aware of, and acknowledge the police. 99% of them are there to keep all of us safe. I definitely would not want them to turn away from the police while holding an object that looked like a handgun as if it were a handgun. I haven't really focused at all on the lady running, as you are well aware. I know you can't help it, but please don't conjure other people's arguments. Have some integrity.

If what I posted about an occupant of the car being a wanted gang member is true, it blows Kommie's entire narrative out of the sky. It should certainly better explain the actions of the car's occupants.

---

You aren't very familiar with the constitution if you think that police can perform drive-by executions on "wanged gang members".

You continue to fail to acknowledge basic human behaviors, which is what we saw here. Even if the victims of gunfire here had just committed a murder, there would be no reason for the police to perform a drive-by shooting. That's just not allowable under any constitutional framework.

Police forces, particularly the LAPD, have perpetrated violence like this against communities of color for decades (more really). That's why so many are distrustful of police and why a person minding his own damn business wouldn't think to run toward police who have opened fire.

Honestly, I can't believe you are continuing to claim otherwise. You think anyone in their right fooking mind would hear gunshots (whatever the origin) and present themselves as a better target?

---

Everything isn't black and white, dude.

---

going4roses said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

going4roses said:

---

At this rate law enforcement is virtually infallible… practically never ever wrong no matter what the actual evidence shows.

You and that mindset(social construct) is the exact reason Critical Legal Studies had to be become a thing because "in order to get a person to support a policy you must first wind the mind "

---

This is exactly right. The starting point (even with corrupt and blundering LAPD) is that the cops are always right. They're shooting at a black guy so the black guy must be a criminal. This was an obviously bad shoot - there was no reason to wantonly fire a weapon. Even if what 003 is saying is true you don't need to fire a weapon. That's why 003 both defends unconditionally and then follows up at the end by acknowledging that it was poor police work.

If I'm a black guy and I see the police speeding toward me with guns blazing of course I fooking run for cover. Look at the girl who gets out of the car to save herself. This is just human survival instinct. There is no way in h=ll that 003 sees cops shooting at him for no reason and walks into gunfire with his hands up. One of the dumbest propositions I've ever heard is to think that any rational person would act differently than the shooting victims here - they did what any other people would do, move to safety in the face of gunfire. 003 is just doing his normal braindead contrarian thing and his opinion should be disregarded entirely as not reflective of any reality we live in.

---

003 does not defend unconditionally. Wrong again, doing your braindead woke crap. I live much closer to this reality than you realize. I hope my kids aren't thinking as stupidly as you are here. I demand better behavior than almost all the people in these videos. In trying to balance kommie's one-sided paragraphs, I never once said the cops should have shot at the person. You fail here buddy.

---

I acknowledge that after inventing any number of baseless defenses for the bad cops, you have repeatedly said that you aren't "saying it's good or proper police work".

But what is your goal here? Are you really teaching your kids that when they are walking into their home and face a hail of gunfire that they should turn around and walk toward danger? If so, you would be the only person on the planet to do so. The victims of this senseless gunfire did what they should have done.

Contrarian nonsense and not reflective of any shared reality.

---

I would teach my kids to respect, be aware of, and acknowledge the police. 99% of them are there to keep all of us safe. I definitely would not want them to turn away from the police while holding an object that looked like a handgun as if it were a handgun. I haven't really focused at all on the lady running, as you are well aware. I know you can't help it, but please don't conjure other people's arguments. Have some integrity.

If what I posted about an occupant of the car being a wanted gang member is true, it blows Kommie's entire narrative out of the sky. It should certainly better explain the actions of the car's occupants.

---

You aren't very familiar with the constitution if you think that police can perform drive-by executions on "wanged gang members".

You continue to fail to acknowledge basic human behaviors, which is what we saw here. Even if the victims of gunfire here had just committed a murder, there would be no reason for the police to perform a drive-by shooting. That's just not allowable under any constitutional framework.

Police forces, particularly the LAPD, have perpetrated violence like this against communities of color for decades (more really). That's why so many are distrustful of police and why a person minding his own damn business wouldn't think to run toward police who have opened fire.

Honestly, I can't believe you are continuing to claim otherwise. You think anyone in their right fooking mind would hear gunshots (whatever the origin) and present themselves as a better target?

---

Everything isn't black and white, dude.

---

Here in lies the qwyte privilege.

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

going4roses said:

---

At this rate law enforcement is virtually infallible… practically never ever wrong no matter what the actual evidence shows.

You and that mindset(social construct) is the exact reason Critical Legal Studies had to be become a thing because "in order to get a person to support a policy you must first wind the mind "

---

This is exactly right. The starting point (even with corrupt and blundering LAPD) is that the cops are always right. They're shooting at a black guy so the black guy must be a criminal. This was an obviously bad shoot - there was no reason to wantonly fire a weapon. Even if what 003 is saying is true you don't need to fire a weapon. That's why 003 both defends unconditionally and then follows up at the end by acknowledging that it was poor police work.

If I'm a black guy and I see the police speeding toward me with guns blazing of course I fooking run for cover. Look at the girl who gets out of the car to save herself. This is just human survival instinct. There is no way in h=ll that 003 sees cops shooting at him for no reason and walks into gunfire with his hands up. One of the dumbest propositions I've ever heard is to think that any rational person would act differently than the shooting victims here - they did what any other people would do, move to safety in the face of gunfire. 003 is just doing his normal braindead contrarian thing and his opinion should be disregarded entirely as not reflective of any reality we live in.

---

003 does not defend unconditionally. Wrong again, doing your braindead woke crap. I live much closer to this reality than you realize. I hope my kids aren't thinking as stupidly as you are here. I demand better behavior than almost all the people in these videos. In trying to balance kommie's one-sided paragraphs, I never once said the cops should have shot at the person. You fail here buddy.

---

I acknowledge that after inventing any number of baseless defenses for the bad cops, you have repeatedly said that you aren't "saying it's good or proper police work".

But what is your goal here? Are you really teaching your kids that when they are walking into their home and face a hail of gunfire that they should turn around and walk toward danger? If so, you would be the only person on the planet to do so. The victims of this senseless gunfire did what they should have done.

Contrarian nonsense and not reflective of any shared reality.

---

I would teach my kids to respect, be aware of, and acknowledge the police. 99% of them are there to keep all of us safe. I definitely would not want them to turn away from the police while holding an object that looked like a handgun as if it were a handgun. I haven't really focused at all on the lady running, as you are well aware. I know you can't help it, but please don't conjure other people's arguments. Have some integrity.

If what I posted about an occupant of the car being a wanted gang member is true, it blows Kommie's entire narrative out of the sky. It should certainly better explain the actions of the car's occupants.

---

You aren't very familiar with the constitution if you think that police can perform drive-by executions on "wanged gang members".

You continue to fail to acknowledge basic human behaviors, which is what we saw here. Even if the victims of gunfire here had just committed a murder, there would be no reason for the police to perform a drive-by shooting. That's just not allowable under any constitutional framework.

Police forces, particularly the LAPD, have perpetrated violence like this against communities of color for decades (more really). That's why so many are distrustful of police and why a person minding his own damn business wouldn't think to run toward police who have opened fire.

Honestly, I can't believe you are continuing to claim otherwise. You think anyone in their right fooking mind would hear gunshots (whatever the origin) and present themselves as a better target?

---

You really have zero reading comprehension if you think I ever said

that police can perform drive-by executions on "wanged gang members".

Everything isn't black and white, dude.

---

You don't have to defend all bad behavior by cops. Some times cops commit misconduct and when they do they should be criticized. But yet here we are with you both acknowledging that you can't claim this is proper police work yet continuing to defend the cops. Textbook example from the 003 contrarian playbook.

---