Discuss and talk about any general topic.
3 posts • Page 1 of 1
If you shot and killed a man, can shedding tears get you off the hook?
Yes, if you're a cop.
Most cops don't even have to do that though. This cop might be showing a bit of remorse, but then he cried directly in front of the camera too, as if to show off.
The guy he shot didn't sound like such a good guy, but that isn't the point. Nor is the point that the cop's life may have been in danger (hint: it wasn't.) The absurdity is that he gets treated as the victim.
I just find it astounding that not only can cops get away with killing scot-free, they get sympathy too. And yet very few Americans see anything wrong with this. Americans are so hopelessly enslaved to Stockholm Syndrome that they will often regard jack-booted thugs as victims when they kill someone. Even the most supposedly solid morality flies out the window in the face of authority figures.
You, as a "civilian," (cops are civilians too, but use the term to separate the pigs from the sheep) would probably not be able to kill a man, cry about it, then get cleared of any wrongdoing. Even if you were, you would probably not be treated as a victim.
A helpful guide:
Expatriation Apocalypse! The Guide to Expatriation for the Broke and Hopeless (Kindle)
Expatriation Apocalypse! (Paperback)
It's neither here nor there, but I'm quite frankly shocked at how overwhelmingly positive the support of this police officer is in the YAHOO COMMENTS of all places. The yahoo comments are a place so toxic that the most innocuous, benign statement on the planet, completely unrelated to any kind of political/social/spiritual agenda whatsoever ("I feel for the guy, and I hope that he and his family are able to get through this") will still have like 10% downvotes.
It's well known that the justice system heavily favors its own, and that it's a significant position of the Republican/Conservative platform (cops are, after all, what protects "real Americans" from the "other" people), so I'm not really surprised about the reaction from those directions at all. If the guy who killed Eric Garner for no reason on camera can walk away scot-free, it's a given that this guy can do it.
Not for nothing, but this guy is crying right where he knows the camera is? Since when do they do things like that? I'm not entirely sure this isn't staged or semi-staged. Maybe the guy that pulled the trigger was acting & the other guys didn't know. It seems he shot someone else, don't know if this was before or after this situation- but if it was before, isn't this a bit odd? If it was after, isn't it a bit odd that those two things happened within such a short span of each other? Just saying what a lawyer would say if a non-cop did all the same things.
Of course a later event could bother someone, even if they didn't cry in the first one. Sometimes things stack up, too. Of course someone could wind up being in two similar situations, even within close sequence with each other. One event doesn't necessarily connect to the other. Even when there's a pattern, it could just so happen to be the same guy each time for no reason- just like if someone lives in a bad neighborhood, they could attacked in numerous different situations that have nothing to do with each other. Isn't it odd that these are not observations made in the criminal process, especially for non-cops?
3 posts • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests