Los Angeles police fatally shot a 14-year-old girl in a Burlington Coat Factory while

[McRocket]

Yep but the question is why did that bullet go through that dressing room?

Physics.

A metal bullet passed through a (I assume) wooden dressing room wall.

 

[AProudLefty]

Physics.

A metal bullet passed through a (I assume) wooden dressing room wall.

Of course. So why shoot at it? Is the dressing room a danger to the cop?

 

[McRocket]

Of course. So why shoot at it? Is the dressing room a danger to the cop?

Don't know.
Don't really care.

I assume the police had a good reason.
Until I see substantial, unbiased evidence to the contrary.

 

[AProudLefty]

Don't know.
Don't really care.

I assume the police had a good reason.
Until I see substantial, unbiased evidence to the contrary.

The cop is not supposed to shoot at unknown place without a reason. Was the perp behind the changing room and shooting through it?

 

[McRocket]

The cop is not supposed to shoot at unknown place without a reason. Was the perp behind the changing room and shooting through it?

I believe in 'innocent until proven guilty'.

I do not much care about it until I see unbiased, factual evidence that the cops did something wrong.

 

[AProudLefty]

I believe in 'innocent until proven guilty'.

I do not much care about it until I see unbiased, factual evidence that the cops did something wrong.

Same thing here.

I am sure the cop is suspended and under investigation.

It's the same thing with Kim Potter.

 

[Sailor]

What were the police supposed to do, wait for a social worker and psychiatrist to arrive and talk the violent, criminal, thug attacking another person through all of his (self concieved, self pity) childhood issues?

Here. Added a little more truth to your statement.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Same thing here.

I am sure the cop is suspended and under investigation.

It's the same thing with Kim Potter.

Not completely. The officer that fired that fatal round didn't see or know that person was present. How is an officer to know that the "stuff" behind the target is penetrable, has an unseen potential target, etc., within it? The officer saw the assailant and fired to stop the action, as trained. If one officer missed and hit a bystander, unseen, then that is an unfortunate happenstance.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

That's a good question.

Thanks. Too bad it won't be answered honestly.

 

[cancel2 2022]

It's time to take police training away from localities.

This is just one more reason why I dismiss 10th Amendment local rule advocates as hopeless idiots and strongly favor strong central government.

For every cop that we have with mental accuity remotely approaching my daughter's,
we have ten or more who belong in padded rooms more than they belong in uniform.

Cops will never be trained properly until we have FEDERAL standards and uniform federal training. If California cops can fuck up this badly,
and they seem to do so regularly,
imagine what podunk flyover-country assholes in mirrored sunglasses must do.

Get the latter involved and its 50/50 whether or not to root for the criminals.

For once I agree with Nasty Knobrot, I hate myself.

 

[Rusty Bell 65]

I believe in 'innocent until proven guilty'.

I do not much care about it until I see unbiased, factual evidence that the cops did something wrong.

He missed. And had no clue what was behind that miss. He's a fuckup. How many rounds did the asshole fire?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Not completely. The officer that fired that fatal round didn't see or know that person was present. How is an officer to know that the "stuff" behind the target is penetrable, has an unseen potential target, etc., within it? The officer saw the assailant and fired to stop the action, as trained. If one officer missed and hit a bystander, unseen, then that is an unfortunate happenstance.

You should know better.

 

[Blackcat13th]

 

[Blackcat13th]

You should know better.

9/10

-1 for being an actual fbi pig.

 

[Blackcat13th]

Shit happens.

Shit has to be put in it's proper place and not in random little girls from a zero responsibility pig's gun.

 

[Blackcat13th]

Shit happens.

Btw, when are you going to grow that "soul" we were talking about

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...ooting-death-of-Chad-Read&highlight=Chad+read

 

[Grumpy]

For once I agree with Nasty Knobrot, I hate myself.

Not to worry my friend ... this one time occurance will soon pass and said post will revert to nonsense again.

 

[Grumpy]

He missed. And had no clue what was behind that miss. He's a fuckup. How many rounds did the asshole fire?

and how far away was he .... and when was the last time ALL of the involved popo's were at the range ... and what were their scores ...

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I might be stupid but I am smart enough to hold off discussion with you until you calm down and be rational.

You're smarter than all the beta male nazis on JPP put together....and that's not saying much.

Two thoughts on this subject:
1) It's the responsibility of the shooter to check their backstop....obviously the bullet stop shouldn't be an innocent human being. Notice the RW douchebags whining about abortion and then backing up the cops in killing an innocent girl. SMH

2) All intelligent gun owners know that a 9mm will go right through the drywall of their home and kill a family member. If a father fired at a burglar, missed and killed his own daughter, would the RWers fault him? Only if they knew he wasn't a Trump fan? Best to use Glaser rounds, shotguns with medium loads (5 or 6 shot) and know what is behind the target when shooting inside or near the home.

 

[AProudLefty]

Not completely. The officer that fired that fatal round didn't see or know that person was present. How is an officer to know that the "stuff" behind the target is penetrable, has an unseen potential target, etc., within it? The officer saw the assailant and fired to stop the action, as trained. If one officer missed and hit a bystander, unseen, then that is an unfortunate happenstance.

Were there innocent bystanders there?