Stupid, Dumb and Just Plain Ignorant Cop Thread
- Thread starter Cannuck
- Start date
Well if it's within department policy then everythings good.......
Columbus police officer curb stomps handcuffed man
An internal police review found multiple supervisors determined that Rosen acted within department policy. But a deputy chief concluded that Rosen’s action was unreasonable and that Rosen used a type of force outside of department’s policy when he stomped on the suspect April 8.
A spokesman for the Fraternal Order of Police said the union disagrees with the recommendation for discipline.
Video posted to YouTube by Roiesha Pettiford shows a portion of the arrest. The suspect, Demarko Anderson, appears to be on the ground with an officer on top of him. Another officer, later identified as Rosen, comes from outside of the frame and kicks Anderson.
Columbus Police Chief recommends 24-hour suspension for officer seen kicking suspect | NBC4i.com
Columbus police officer curb stomps handcuffed man
An internal police review found multiple supervisors determined that Rosen acted within department policy. But a deputy chief concluded that Rosen’s action was unreasonable and that Rosen used a type of force outside of department’s policy when he stomped on the suspect April 8.
A spokesman for the Fraternal Order of Police said the union disagrees with the recommendation for discipline.
Video posted to YouTube by Roiesha Pettiford shows a portion of the arrest. The suspect, Demarko Anderson, appears to be on the ground with an officer on top of him. Another officer, later identified as Rosen, comes from outside of the frame and kicks Anderson.
Columbus Police Chief recommends 24-hour suspension for officer seen kicking suspect | NBC4i.com
NICE GOING T-GURL---we are talking TWO DIFFERENT AMERICAN CASES- so now you are the proven LIAR! The OTHER video- the one we Cdns were shown. was filmed looking into the driver side window and clearly showed the black guy in the back seat-with a LONE cop talking to him- with the cop standing on the PASSENGER SIDE of the car! Its no problem of mine that you cannot keep them straight!
YOUR video shows ALL the talking being done by the cop on the driver side- with the cop on the side walk getting to about 10ft from the car before the gunfire erupts and he is then skipping away from the line of fire.
The video I refer to shows the cop on the passenger side doing the talking AND being the one to fire! in addition the video we were shown and which I refer to DID NOT have a child in the car as your video does!
Apparently there are so many shootings in the Excited States of America that you cannot keep proper track? Or are you just spewing fresh ripe, steaming, straight from the back of the bull organic fertilizer as usual? And I think you play up to this confusion making things look worse than they are? Why comment on a Cdn web site about a video WE Cdns have never seen and why IGNORE the video WE DID SEE AND DID COMMENT ON?
A whole lot of Cdns WILL recall that video on CITY tv in which the distraught woman looks at the cop on the passenger side of the car and says quite calmly: "sir, I think you just shot his arm off" -WITH NO COMMENT LIKE THAT IN YOUR VIDEO!
And where was the guy in the back seat- ADMITTING to the LONE cop that he was armed? So- two cases and you are clueless about the second one!
TWO SEPARATE CASES AND ONE GUY LYING ABOUT COPS-the T-gurl with his frilly knickers in a twist because HE cannot keep the cases straight! And we are BACK to my previous statement about how black people cannot seem to behave properly in contact with police!
Consider the video shown to CDNS: Oh dear me, the T-gurl INSISTS there was a `partner` at that routine traffic stop that resulted in a black guy getting “his arm shot off”. That’s odd as our Cdn news media billed it as a routine traffic stop by a lone cop simply trying to deal with a busted tail light and it ends up somehow with gunfire.
The police dash camera video was excellent- very steady and well focused- clearly it was NOT taken from the body camera of a second cop otherwise there would be camera movement. The audio was also excellent and there is NO second cop voice to be heard! In the video played to the media there is NO sign of a second cop at all- no shadow, no movement, no voice. Should we assume T-gurly is producing `fake` news to bolster his WEAK position? Oh, no- he has let us know we are talking two different cases!
The video shown to Cdns shows ONE cop with gun drawn- and we know that if one cop pulls his gun, then generally they all do. And ONLY one cop fired his gun in the video and we all know that if one cop is scared enough to fire then usually they all join in- so how come there is ONLY one gun in this case? Unless there is NO second cop and T-gurly is simply running his `version` of truth as usual?
Should we ask if the alleged `partner` was off sick that day and thus not available? And thus- as I have said- a lone cop WILL have trouble with multiple suspects! Or maybe the alleged second cop was back in the cruiser running requests for information on the detained black couple and thus not available for support?
And how is it that a $30.00 ticket for a broken tail light can end up in gunfire and death- unless- as I have asserted- that black people too often do not know how to behave around cops?
And we-the general public know very well how carefully LIE-beral minded `leaders` will edit the truth and there has been some careful editing in this case! Let us ask why the news video BEGAN with cop gun already drawn and pointed? What happened to persuade cop he NEEDED the gun out? In the video the cop gun came out BEFORE the black guy admitted to being armed.
And how is it that the black guy was in the back seat- with girlfriend in the front drivers seat? Don’t couples usually sit together? Lets ask if there might have been a third person in the car in the front seat before cop got to the passenger side window? And where might that person be now? Is it possible the routine traffic stop got messy after a passenger jumped out of the front seat and took off running before cop got out of the cruiser and thus prompted cop to assume this is NO LONGER ROUTINE?
We all know how LIE-berals bend over backwards to protect the `rights` of thugs so shall we ask if the black couple in the car have a history with cops? Is that why cop got so agitated? Dealing with known felons can make a guy nervous!
Those with sharp eyes will recall the tale of the poor and infamous black guy shot by a cop in Ferguson, Missouri. The guy was HUGE and TOUGH and had a history of beating up on cops! The guy was tough enough to beat on any TWO cops on the force. In addition he had a LONG rap sheet for all manner of assaults and robberies and general thuggery! The goon got shot because it was the ONLY way for the cop to protect himself and control the `suspect`!
Our LIE-beral hug a thug overlords think it is prejudicial to discuss the long criminal history of accused goons such as the Ferguson thug! So they HIDE evidence and distort public perception! LIE-berals are more concerned about the rights of thugs than about honesty and the public perception of cops! LIE-beral judges think it is bigotry to allow news media to show clear surveillance video of the Ferguson thug robbing a store and threatening the owner!
LIE-berals want the thug to be examined on a carefully LIMITED and EDITED standard, one LOADED with reverse bigotry! Yet LIE-berals expect to persuade us to be hostile to cops based on what we KNOW to be biased and limited information! Stupid LIE-berals sabotage their own case by spewing fresh, ripe, steaming, straight from the back of the bull, organic fertilizer all over cases like this!
As for our little T-gurl- clearly he is not accustomed to being contradicted in any way and has now got his frilly knickers in a twist and he is devoted to the LIE-beral version of logic that dictates that the truth may be edited for the `good` of HIS cause!
And now we are back to my original assertion that too many black people - and some T-gurlies do not know how to behave around cops! Too many LIE-berals think the best way to persuade the public of the value of a cause is to BURY IT in loads of fresh, ripe, steaming, straight from the back of the bull, organic fertilizer! In any contentious debate, too many LIE-berals use their mouths as manure spreaders and then wonder why truth, logic, justice and public acceptance of LIE-beral values will not grow in such a toxic spew!
I dont know what you people are up to down there in the The Excited States of America but we dont have to much of that crap here. And we resent it when you try to suggest that our cops are that bad! We still have a level of common sense and logic that works fairly well- though our LIE-berals are working constantly to undermine it!
Consider what we think of your issue with Professor Gates:
I stand by my assertion that too many black people simply do not know how to deal with cops. The best example is that of professor Gates- the black guy who got arrested early in the first term of Barak Obama. There was a big fuss and to quell the complaints, Obama invited the cop and Gates to the White House to make peace and smooth things over and sadly Obama did NEITHER! He simply PROVED that black people- even a President- don’t understand their civil rights and obligations!
Consider: Gates is wealthy and a little famous. He is the author of “The Classic Slave Narratives”- a book documenting the life of some slaves living in the American South. The book was well researched and well received. Gates was already a history professor at some well known university and lived in an upscale neighbourhood someplace outside Washington DC. It is one of those neighbourhoods with houses set well back from the road and with lots of high hedges and such. The sort of place where few people apparently know their neighbours.
One weekday morning, Gates was working from home and went out at mid morning to collect his mail. A random gust of wind blew his front door shut and it locked and there he was on the doorstep with no keys. And there was nobody home- wife gone for the day, kids in school etc.
So a very angry and frustrated Gates starts circling the house, looking for a way in. Maybe a window lock he can force open , a back door carelessly left unlocked. But there is nothing to be seen and he ends up back at the front door. Gates does not know that a near sighted neighbor has been watching him and does not recognize him as her neighbor. All the old girl can see is some guy trying to break into the house- and that IS what Gates is trying to do! So she phones the cops and reports a prowler and a cruiser with 2 cops arrives at the scene.
The 2 cops immediately spot the `prowler` trying to jimmy open the front door and they approach and ask the usual questions: “who are you” ; “where do you live” ; “why are you trying to break into this house”; show us ID”? Obvious questions of a SPECIFIED legal sort!
And Gates, being an angry black guy- and yeah, being locked out of your own house will provoke a guy- with lots of book learning and NO street smarts at all answers back unwisely! Any white guy in such a situation is smart enough to know that an answer such as : mind your own `fcuking` business will not fly! But that is Gates response and he sticks to it! Because of course the cops ARE taking care of business. They have a prowler on their hands and are LEGALLY required to get an explanation- its their JOB to protect people and property!
So they get uncooperative Gates in handcuffs and search him and he has no ID on him and no way to get into the house to retrieve it and prove that he has a right to fiddle with his door locks if it suits him. And the cops cannot simply let Gates go because he WAS CAUGHT red handed trying to break into a house and has offered no explanation and no identification- he has only been loud mouthed and obnoxious! So Gates gets a free ride down to the local station and is held there till he can be identified and then released once he can prove that the whole mess is a screwup brought on by a random gust of wind and his own stupidity!
If Gates had immediately told the cops who he was and that he had locked himself out, the cops could have maybe looked up his drivers license, credit cards or other documents and maybe got some proof of identity that way and it would have simplified things. But with Gates being a belligerent and uncooperative prick telling cops nothing, he made the cops do things the hard way. The cops cannot simply let the un-identified prowler/suspect go just because HE demands it! And some knuckleheads want to call this an act of police bigotry? HAHAHAHAHA!
Then, to make matters worse, the numbskull Obama has to get involved and act as if it is the cops who have screwed up by arresting a prowler! The cops caught a prowler red handed, one who refused to identify himself and was belligerent and refused to even give his name. Those cops did not know or care whose property they were defending- they were focused only on the attempted break in. Gates got exactly the same treatment as any other suspected felon and ought to be grateful the cops are doing their duty in guarding HIS property! Though cops may not be so quick to rush to that property to answer any future calls since the owner is such a troublesome jackass!
Gates was the author of his own misfortune and for him or Obama to say otherwise is clear proof that too many black people do not understand their rights and civil obligations!
And it might help if some of you Yankee type LIE-berals recognized that Canada is a foreign country with some rather different values!
Diamond Reynolds's video was reversed, retard.
But I must say, you're good for a laugh. And no, laughing at retards don't bother me a bit.
Texas (read white)Kids Told 'It's Illegal' to Sell Lemonade Without a Permit
But Andria and Zoey Green's business closed abruptly Monday after police came by to tell them their stand was illegal without a city Peddler's Permit, according to Overton Police Department Chief Clyde Carter.
The girls' mother, Sandi Evans, said they went to try to get a Peddler's Permit at City Hall, but found out they'd have to get licensed by the Rusk County Health Department before being allowed a Peddler's Permit.
The Rusk County Health Department did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for additional information including specific details about the process for getting a permit to sell lemonade.
"Once we found out everything we would have to go through, we just decided to stop technically selling the lemonade," Evans told ABC News today. "The girls are still going to have the stand, but they're just going to ask for donations instead."
Texas Kids Told 'It's Illegal' to Sell Lemonade Without a Permit - ABC News
kids white, police chief white... I guess its non news
But Andria and Zoey Green's business closed abruptly Monday after police came by to tell them their stand was illegal without a city Peddler's Permit, according to Overton Police Department Chief Clyde Carter.
The girls' mother, Sandi Evans, said they went to try to get a Peddler's Permit at City Hall, but found out they'd have to get licensed by the Rusk County Health Department before being allowed a Peddler's Permit.
The Rusk County Health Department did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for additional information including specific details about the process for getting a permit to sell lemonade.
"Once we found out everything we would have to go through, we just decided to stop technically selling the lemonade," Evans told ABC News today. "The girls are still going to have the stand, but they're just going to ask for donations instead."
Texas Kids Told 'It's Illegal' to Sell Lemonade Without a Permit - ABC News
kids white, police chief white... I guess its non news
Last edited:
There you have it, folks. The insanity of the right-wing mind. To Trumpchumps, the fact that they heard about something from ABC News is proof that the mainstream media is ignoring it.
Here is some more little T-gurly....see if you can read and still laugh?
Hey you sordid little T-gurly, did you miss me? Unlike you I do have a life beyond online! But I did have a look at the details you have omitted from your Yannez lynching party argument! Its really quite remarkable how little real truth and justice our LIE-beral dominated legal system and its LIE-beral loving media allies will allow us to see for fear of losing ethnic and immigrant voter support! Those wretched LIE-berals will make us pay any price so THEY can cling to power!
Grossly foolish LIE-berals really ought to think more about the circumstances under which cops `interact` with the public-consider this:
The truth is that NO cop wants to shoot a suspect! What a cop WANTS is to spot a suspect on the street and to handcuff him and take him to the station for interrogation. If the suspect has a good alibi then its apologies all around and suspect is set free and cop goes looking for somebody else. If the suspect has NO alibi and can be properly connected to some crime then he is arrested and charged; with the cop getting a pat on the back from his boss- and maybe a promotion for his sharp eyes and diligent police work!
This is in SHARP contrast to the consequences of SHOOTING a suspect! For one thing a dead man cannot be charged with anything and cannot be questioned either- so with a shooting, there can be no resolution to an existing crime; and it generates a whole NEW mess to deal with. To shoot a suspect simply generates a huge legal mess- even when clearly justified its not a solution any cop wants. AND a cop shooting opens up the doors to all sorts of lunatics- like YOU- from idiot groups like Black Lives matter. To shoot a suspect is a sign of desperation from a cop who has been driven into a corner with no other options- the cop eliminates a lethal threat to save HIS life!
Its odd how LIE-berals will defend somebody killed by a cop regardless of circumstances- but will IGNORE the actions of armed robbers! How much of a BIGOT do you have to be to shrug off the terror of a store clerk staring down the barrel of a robbers gun and focus ONLY on the confrontation between a cop and a suspect? Want to bet the store clerk would tell a cop: “if you have to shoot the felon to keep him from robbing me again that is just fine with me”?
There is the BLM bigot dilemma- the cops ARE serving the public and every store clerk and taxi driver working night shifts considers cops to be their GOOD FRIENDS! Now consider the details of the Officer Yanez shooting AND the details LIE-berals don’t want us to know about:
Based on my research, The Pioneer Press of Minnesota has presented the most full and detailed description of the Yanez case- with a number of pieces being presented to the public on successive days in mid June, with reporter Sarah Horner leading the coverage. You can find all the details for yourself T-gurly- on the Pioneer Press website- if you are interested and we know you ain’t because the truth is an awkward bitch for such as you!
By Sarah Horner | shorner@pioneerpress.com, Tad Vezner | tvezner@pioneerpress.com and Mara H. Gottfried | mgottfried@pioneerpress.com | Pioneer Press. PUBLISHED: June 2017. Sarah Horner joined the Pioneer Press in 2011. She covers legal affairs in St. Paul and the surrounding suburbs.
Here is my synopsis of the available facts and testimony taken mainly from Pioneer Press as their coverage is deemed most open, comprehensive and even handed:
In an earlier post I said that a pair of cops working together is safer for both cops and the public and I also said that Yanez was alone when he shot Castile- based on a HEAVILY EDITED video shown to Cdns. Oh T-gurly- YOU LIED when you said Yanez had a partner!
Joseph Kauser was an officer in another cop cruiser some blocks away when Yanez radioed him and asked for backup. Yanez was convinced- based on appearance- that Castile might have been the armed robber who hit a gas station convenience store a few days previously so he was being cautious even before getting Castile to pull over. Kauser arrived AFTER Yanez began talking with Castile. The video YOU have posted shows Kauser arriving and getting to about ten feet from the passenger side door of the car when the shooting started. Kauser never set eyes on Castile before the shooting started!
Based on trial testimony we can discuss in a moment, its possible Castile never even saw Kauser arrive and a cop you do not see does not scare you much! So my statement that two cops are safer than one stands! IN fact, IF Castile WAS the armed felon that Yanez suspected him to be then TWO COPS might have daunted Castile into surrendering instead of fighting. All desperate felons know its easier to escape from one cop than from two!
But we will never know if Castile was a felon because reverse racist LIE-berals will not besmirch the name of a dead man! Castile cannot defend himself due to being dead and thus he is rendered forever innocent in the minds of LIE-berals! Those wretched LIE-berals are so sensitive that they will not even discuss whether Castile MIGHT have matched the description of the felon Yanez was seeking- even in some small way!
I know we are entitled to the presumption of innocence but that is for judge and jury! A cop DOES NOT work that way and it’s not something many people have noticed! A cop gathers information and makes HIS choice- and when he takes you in it is because he thinks you ARE Guilty! And the law allows the cops certain leeway regarding using FORCE to COMPEL you to come with him! You are expected to be aware of the consequences of not complying. And then the cop presents his beliefs and facts before a judge who makes the final choice. It is when you are in front of a judge and jury that the presumption of innocence DOES kick in as the judge is the impartial referee between prosecution and defense!
After Yanez fatally shot Philando Castile, he said he thought Castile would act recklessly because he smelled marijuana in his car.
Jeronimo Yanez told the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension in an interview the day after the shooting that he initially pulled Castile over as he thought he matched the description of a suspect in a gas-station robbery he had responded to a week prior to the shooting.
Yanez said he smelled the odor of "burnt" marijuana in Castile's car as he walked up to the driver's side window. He didn't tell Castile that he smelled the marijuana at first because he didn't want Castile to "react in a defensive manner."
Yanez told Castile that he had a busted taillight.
Yanez asked Castile for his driver’s license and proof of insurance at his driver’s-side window before Castile told him, “Sir, I have to tell you, I do have a firearm on me.” Castile had a permit to carry the gun but never disclosed that to the officer.
Yanez replied, “OK, don’t reach for it then,” prompting Castile to say, “I’m not reaching for it.”
According to Yanez’s squad car audio and video of the shooting, the officer then twice said, “Don’t pull it out.”
So a total of THREE TIMES, Yanez told Castile Not to reach for the gun yet he continued to move around and soon got shot because of his erratic behaviour.
Yanez’s defense team drew attention at trial to THC found in Castile’s system during his autopsy, suggesting it was proof Castile was high during the shooting and was therefore culpable for what happened.
Yanez said he was worried that Castile may be carrying a weapon for protection from drug dealers or others trying to "rip" or steal from him. "It appeared to me that he had no regard to what I was saying," Yanez said. "He didn’t care what I was saying. He still reached down."
Yanez, among several who took the stand, testified, sometimes through tears, that he had no choice but to shoot Castile after he said he saw Castile gripping his pistol in his front right shorts pocket despite the officer’s orders for him not to reach for the gun.
The state argued Castile was trying to access his wallet to hand over the driver’s license Yanez had requested when the officer “jumped to conclusions” and needlessly shot him. It made no sense-said the state- that Castile — who was wearing a seat belt while traveling home with his girlfriend and her small child from the grocery store — would choose to grab his gun and shoot the officer after being stopped for a broken taillight, prosecutors said.
But I suggest perhaps it DOES make sense to reach for a gun IF your are a desperate and stoned felon planning to flee from a cop?
State law allows police officers to use deadly force when faced with a threat to themselves or someone else. The officer’s conduct must be in line with what another reasonable officer would do under the same circumstances.
Had Castile only listened to Yanez’s commands, two experts hired for the defense testified in court, Castile would still be alive. But when he went for his gun, they said Yanez was forced to shoot.
WE all know that Yankees have the right to bear arms but what about the FOR- GOTTEN portion of the Constitution that lets us know the arms being borne are SUPPOSED to be in the hands of a “well disciplined militia”! Founding fathers never planned for armed stoners wandering the streets!
The state has not explained why Castile was carrying his gun while grocery shopping with his girlfriend Diamond Reynolds and her daughter. If in fact Yanez was right in believing Castile was an armed felon then there IS reason for Castile to be carrying the gun for protection and its also valid reason for Castile to be reaching for the gun in spite of being told to sit still THREE TIMES. The state has not explained why Castile was carrying a gun and is it also possible he was carrying it because he was going to buy more Weed and had the gun as assurance he would be dealt with fairly? Or had it for collecting a debt or some such thing?
Anna Garnaas-Halvorson is a teacher from J.J. Hill Montessori Magnet school and was the first witness called by the state. She worked at the school where Castile served as a supervisor of food services. She testified about Castile’s good character and strong reputation within the school community. That’s nice- he has friends at work but he is not the first man who may have had a second life unknown to his colleagues! So cafeteria food supervisor is Castile`s main job with the possibility that armed robber is a side line? But AGAIN, we will never know for sure! He is beyond questioning or prosecution now!
Yanez said he opened fire because Castile was gripping his gun despite orders not to reach for it. Reynolds disputed that. Castile’s wallet was later discovered by medical staff at Hennepin County Medical Center, where he was treated for his gunshot wounds. Hospital staff weren’t able to tell investigators which pocket his wallet was in. Reynolds testified Castile kept his pocket in his back left pocket. His driver’s license and permit to carry were inside his wallet. But testimony says Castile had already handed Yanez his insurance form before the shooting- and since the wallet was still in his pants pocket when he got to hospital then were was he reaching when he was shot? What pocket was the insurance form he produced stored in? Maybe in the same pocket as the gun?
Various cops and fire dept personnel testified that Castile`s GUN was in the right pocket- that right side from which Yanez says he saw something black emerging in Castile`s right hand. Yanez obviously DID see the gun in Castile`s pants pocket and was right to be concerned when Castile did not follow instructions!
During her cross-examination, Reynolds testified that she and Castile regularly smoked marijuana and that she had smoked it on the day of the shooting. She also said they had marijuana in the car when they got pulled over, but that it was under her seat. Authorities found it inside a closed plastic bag tucked inside a jar on top of her seat. The jar’s lid was off.
Cops found 6 grams of Weed in the car. AS Castile HAD THC in his system at the time of death and as Reynolds has admitted they smoked up often and that she had smoked up earlier that day it seems pretty fair to say Castile was STONED at the time of the shooting! The ONLY questions are HOW MUCH Castile smoked and WHEN! How stoned was he?
Juan Toran was the Roseville police officer who responded to the shooting that night. He was the third cop to get to the scene and arrived when Yanez still had his gun pointed inside Castile’s car.
It was when they turned Castile’s body to place him on a backboard that he (Toran) says he saw Castile’s black semi-automatic handgun sliding out of his right front pocket. Toran said he removed it the rest of the way and placed it on the pavement in a safe location. He guarded the firearm until the scene was taped off.
James Diehl is an instructor at Total Defense gun range in Ramsey, Minn., where Castile took his permit-to-carry class before acquiring his gun permit. He testified that it’s illegal to use marijuana and carry a firearm and also for an applicant to lie on a federal permit-to-carry application about use of illegal substances. The defense alleged at trial that Castile lied about his marijuana use when he applied for his permit and therefore he acquired it illegally. Telling a little fib about Weed use is hardly unique in our modern culture. The real point is that Castile WAS STONED at the time of his death and how much it impaired his judgement?
Diehl also testified that he instructs his students to first tell officers during traffic stops that they have a permit to carry before disclosing that they have the firearm. Relaying information in reverse order could “affect (an officer’s) mind-set,” Diehl testified during cross examination,
In other testimony, James Diehl said he teaches students that, when they’re pulled over by police, first to tell officers they have a permit to carry. Then they should say they have a firearm on them, Diehl said. He said he also tells them to follow all police commands while keeping their hands visible.
“Why is that?” Gray asked.
“Mentioning you have a firearm before you say you have a permit could affect the officer’s (mind-set),” Diehl said.
“And lead to chaos?” Gray asked.
“Correct,” Diehl replied.
So the expert with experience HAS tried to warn Castile about the sort of trouble he can get into while wandering in public with a gun! And Castile was sober enough to remember SOME of his training-he did tell Yanez he had a gun but did Not sit quietly and keep his hands in plain sight. Instead Castile IGNORED three commands NOT to reach for the gun and got shot for it. Diehl also explained that under Minnesota law, a citizen does not have to tell a cop he is carrying a gun- but its not a stretch to think that Castile told Yanez about the gun because Yanez could see the outline of it in his pants pocket and figured it would be best to admit the truth? Or should we just assume Castile was stoned and not to sure what he was saying and ran into foolish trouble?
Emanuel Kapelsohn was one of a number of experts hired by both sides to testify about use of force training and related matters. Kapelsohn said it would have taken Castile three-tenths of a second to remove his gun from his pocket, versus five-tenths of a second for Yanez to react to that threat. That means that if Yanez is telling the truth about what he saw, the officer could have been shot and killed had he not responded immediately to Castile’s grip on his gun, Kapelsohn said.
This statement by Kapelsohn was dissected and disputed with no hard conclusion being reached. What we CAN be sure of is that in the sort of quick draw contest described in court- with Castile drawing his gun and Yanez responding ONLY AFTER he clearly saw Castile`s gun, it would be a VERY CLOSE contest- with NO guarantee that Yanez would come out alive. The odds presented by the experts seem to show that in that quick draw contest, the odds were more in favour of Castile and that Yanez saved his own life by shooting first rather than simply responding to movement by Castile. And THAT reaction by Yanez IS part of police training!
Other key points were made by Kapelsohn Friday morning related to the level of danger Yanez placed Castile’s girlfriend and young child in when he opened fire into Castile’s vehicle.
Had Yanez not shot, Kapelsohn said, a gunfight could have erupted between Castile, Yanez and possibly Yanez’s police partner- Kauser- who was coming up on the other side of Castile’s vehicle that night.
Instead of retreating to a safer position for himself, he added that Yanez remained at Castile’s window so he could point down and to the left to avoid injury to the other passengers in the car. “Yanez endangered himself to try and make it less dangerous for the two other people involved,” Kapelsohn said.
Another `use of force` expert suggested that Yanez should have de-escalated and disengaged from the scene by stepping away but that seems like nonsense. He was totally exposed in the street with no immediate place to hide and no guarantee that Castile would not shoot at him as he backed away.
Further, as Castile was stoned to some degree- we can only say he was not in a condition to be driving and that if Yanez had let him flee the scene it might have resulted in a car crash and more trouble! Then there is the added issue of asking this: if Yanez decided not confront Castile at that time about the armed felon suspicions because of the presence of the woman and child; then WHEN WOULD be a good time for a confrontation? Would cop haters have been any happier of cops had shown up at the school cafeteria where Castile worked-surrounded by kids- so they could arrest him there? That is the ugly side of police work- our cities are BUSY places and there are always innocent victims in the way!
Yanez was simply doing his job in seeking out a person he believed might be an armed felon. That Castile appeared to be too stoned to deal with the matter in a sensible way is NOT the fault of cops and does NOT indicate bigotry! The various `experts` agreed at trial, that if Castile had followed police instructions and his firearm training and kept his hands on the steering wheel he would be alive today. If he had been sensible, he would have left the gun at home. If he had been MORE sensible, he would not have driven the car in his stoned condition.
And if Castile lived in a country where the full and complete truth was told in open court and NOT then subject to cutting and editing by LIE-beral loving sensation seeking news media; and if we did NOT have a LIE-beral govt so desperate to cling to power that they would rather pluck out their own eyes than say anything bad about a doped up ethnic stoner, then we might not be literally throwing gasoline on the bonfire ignited by Black Lives Matter reverse bigots!
And what of the govt choice to pay the Castile family three million dollars for their pain and suffering? Since when did the govt start writing life insurance policies for armed and stupid stoners?
And it was also decided by govt that Yanez should be offered a deal to encourage HIM to leave the police force and this does seem necessary since he would forever after be a lightning rod for trouble- whether deserved or otherwise. So he was paid to take his family and leave town and you have to figure HIS payment was also in the millions in exchange for being BRIBED to slink away and not make a fuss simply because he defended himself from an armed and foolish stoner? AFTER being declared NOT GUILTY!
And is it not interesting that of the 12 jury members, 2 were black and from the start of jury deliberations they are reported to have supported Yanez! Some black people do see very clearly how the law should work! Some black people do work as store clerks and understand the issues and RISKS quite well!
Last year, the Toronto (Red) Star newspaper told us that a typical Cdn lawyer defending a client accused of murder gets paid about half a million dollars- with at least that much more going to the prosecution. Then add in all the other costs for bailiffs and court reporters and added security for such a sensational trial and lost work from the hundreds of candidates ordered to appear for possible jury selection and you have how many more hundreds of thousands in costs? So a million dollars or maybe two million for the trial and lawyers and assorted experts, plus at least five million and maybe 6 -7 million to deal with the pain and suffering of the Castile and Yanez families and you have a bill of between 6 and 10 million dollars and all because some stoner could not go out for groceries without his gun and ran into some cop who was just doing his job in hunting an armed felon!
And hey- T-gurly- we all KNOW how loud you would scream if some armed thug stole your computer! And we know how quickly you would be on the phone to the cops you hate- to urge them find and punish those who threatened you and cut off your propaganda disseminating lifeline! And if they could not find it you are just the kind of guy to assume they are racists and don’t care about your stolen property! And if they DO find it, then you will go right back to throwing mud at them! Such behaviour is called HYPOCRISY!
The Yanez shooting is the natural result of letting stoners wander around in public with guns! Guns and drugs do NOT mix! U.S. gun law forbids a stoner from carrying a gun because they are not in their right and careful minds while stoned. U.S. law recognizes that carrying a gun can cause “chaos” in a traffic stop as Diehl the firearms trainer told the court and he stressed the care with which a person carrying a gun should deal with cops. Stoner Castile did virtually NOTHING right in his meeting with Yanez and got shot for being A STUPID STONED THREAT!
And what about the Cdn kids kicked out of a public park for selling lemonade without a permit? Cops ONLY respond to crap like this if somebody complains! Or if its public property!
And hey-Tgurly- its the CRAP yuo leave out of ALL your arguments that is killing your poisoned position! Read it all and weep if you dare! |But we know you will say you didn't read it even though we KNOW you devoured every word!
I did. I enjoy laughing at retards.
So, you finally figured out that it was the same video, that Yanez did have a partner, and that Philando Castile was driving?
Took you long enough, but I suppose liars and fools are loath to give up their lies and folly.
Explain to me how an acquittal is a "lynching." This should be fun.
So, I take it you're upset that Yanez was acquitted? Either that or you're just proving again that you're as retarded as the Hansen brothers.
One thing I dislike about the British adversarial system. It makes the ambiance in the court room feel like that of a war zone.
Okay.....I have stopped laughing and can now comment on your British adversarial legal system statement....did you actually read any of the previously posted stuff about the Yanez/Castile shooting? IT IS A WAR ZONE in the Yankee courts! Its black armed robbers against cops and the public- with a black stoner who forgot virtually ALL the inadequate firearm training he got and was to stoned to respond to police instructions caught in the crossfire! ALL the `experts` on BOTH SIDES of the Yanez trial agree on ONE THING: that if Castile had obeyed cop instructions and kept his hands in plain sight on the steering wheel, we would NOT be talking about him because he would be alive!
As for our resident T-gurly/Tecumsehbonesfor brains- the guy is LYING STILL and insisting on making up facts! He has done nothing but lie throughout any discussion of Yanez! How you think any of this makes the British system worse than the Yankee version is beyond me!
Why dont you go watch that old movie Erin Brokovitch- specifically the climactic scene in the court room where she hands the CEO that glass of water with chemical in it- and the CEO will drink water with a little chemical in it but will not drink a full glass of it- the point being that in British law it is easier to make the case the chemical is bad for you- that science does not know what constitutes an unhealthy does simply means Brit law errs on the side of greater caution than the Yankee version! You are a little safer with Brits-noyt much but a little and I will take what I can get!
And hey T-gurly- you have said that the video shown to Cdns was played BACKWARDS....so HOW and WHY did that happen? And WTF were they editing out? Cdn media loves the LIE-berals just as much as Washington Post! With people like the T-gurly defending truth, justice and the American way we will all be shouting Sieg Heil at each other in no time at all!
This plague of fake news and political correctness will kill us all! So keep laughing T-gurly- the rest of us are disgusted with the fakery!
The only people who think fake news is useful are those who have gone off their `meds`!
And just so people get the FULL flavour of that fresh, ripe, steaming, fresh from the back of the bull organic fertilizer the T-gurl is spewing- here is a repost of the truth the Gurl is failing to hide
But I did have a look at the details you have omitted from your Yannez lynching party argument! Its really quite remarkable how little real truth and justice our LIE-beral dominated legal system and its LIE-beral loving media allies will allow us to see for fear of losing ethnic and immigrant voter support! Those wretched LIE-berals will make us pay any price so THEY can cling to power!
Grossly foolish LIE-berals really ought to think more about the circumstances under which cops `interact` with the public-consider this:
The truth is that NO cop wants to shoot a suspect! What a cop WANTS is to spot a suspect on the street and to handcuff him and take him to the station for interrogation. If the suspect has a good alibi then its apologies all around and suspect is set free and cop goes looking for somebody else. If the suspect has NO alibi and can be properly connected to some crime then he is arrested and charged; with the cop getting a pat on the back from his boss- and maybe a promotion for his sharp eyes and diligent police work!
This is in SHARP contrast to the consequences of SHOOTING a suspect! For one thing a dead man cannot be charged with anything and cannot be questioned either- so with a shooting, there can be no resolution to an existing crime; and it generates a whole NEW mess to deal with. To shoot a suspect simply generates a huge legal mess- even when clearly justified its not a solution any cop wants. AND a cop shooting opens up the doors to all sorts of lunatics- like YOU- from idiot groups like Black Lives matter. To shoot a suspect is a sign of desperation from a cop who has been driven into a corner with no other options- the cop eliminates a lethal threat to save HIS life!
Its odd how LIE-berals will defend somebody killed by a cop regardless of circumstances- but will IGNORE the actions of armed robbers! How much of a BIGOT do you have to be to shrug off the terror of a store clerk staring down the barrel of a robbers gun and focus ONLY on the confrontation between a cop and a suspect? Want to bet the store clerk would tell a cop: “if you have to shoot the felon to keep him from robbing me again that is just fine with me”?
There is the BLM bigot dilemma- the cops ARE serving the public and every store clerk and taxi driver working night shifts considers cops to be their GOOD FRIENDS! Now consider the details of the Officer Yanez shooting AND the details LIE-berals don’t want us to know about:
Based on my research, The Pioneer Press of Minnesota has presented the most full and detailed description of the Yanez case- with a number of pieces being presented to the public on successive days in mid June, with reporter Sarah Horner leading the coverage. You can find all the details for yourself T-gurly- on the Pioneer Press website- if you are interested and we know you ain’t because the truth is an awkward bitch for such as you!
By Sarah Horner | shorner@pioneerpress.com, Tad Vezner | tvezner@pioneerpress.com and Mara H. Gottfried | mgottfried@pioneerpress.com | Pioneer Press. PUBLISHED: June 2017. Sarah Horner joined the Pioneer Press in 2011. She covers legal affairs in St. Paul and the surrounding suburbs.
Here is my synopsis of the available facts and testimony taken mainly from Pioneer Press as their coverage is deemed most open, comprehensive and even handed:
In an earlier post I said that a pair of cops working together is safer for both cops and the public and I also said that Yanez was alone when he shot Castile- based on a HEAVILY EDITED video shown to Cdns. Oh T-gurly- YOU LIED when you said Yanez had a partner!
Joseph Kauser was an officer in another cop cruiser some blocks away when Yanez radioed him and asked for backup. Yanez was convinced- based on appearance- that Castile might have been the armed robber who hit a gas station convenience store a few days previously so he was being cautious even before getting Castile to pull over. Kauser arrived AFTER Yanez began talking with Castile. The video YOU have posted shows Kauser arriving and getting to about ten feet from the passenger side door of the car when the shooting started. Kauser never set eyes on Castile before the shooting started!
Based on trial testimony we can discuss in a moment, its possible Castile never even saw Kauser arrive and a cop you do not see does not scare you much! So my statement that two cops are safer than one stands! IN fact, IF Castile WAS the armed felon that Yanez suspected him to be then TWO COPS might have daunted Castile into surrendering instead of fighting. All desperate felons know its easier to escape from one cop than from two!
But we will never know if Castile was a felon because reverse racist LIE-berals will not besmirch the name of a dead man! Castile cannot defend himself due to being dead and thus he is rendered forever innocent in the minds of LIE-berals! Those wretched LIE-berals are so sensitive that they will not even discuss whether Castile MIGHT have matched the description of the felon Yanez was seeking- even in some small way!
I know we are entitled to the presumption of innocence but that is for judge and jury! A cop DOES NOT work that way and it’s not something many people have noticed! A cop gathers information and makes HIS choice- and when he takes you in it is because he thinks you ARE Guilty! And the law allows the cops certain leeway regarding using FORCE to COMPEL you to come with him! You are expected to be aware of the consequences of not complying. And then the cop presents his beliefs and facts before a judge who makes the final choice. It is when you are in front of a judge and jury that the presumption of innocence DOES kick in as the judge is the impartial referee between prosecution and defense!
After Yanez fatally shot Philando Castile, he said he thought Castile would act recklessly because he smelled marijuana in his car.
Jeronimo Yanez told the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension in an interview the day after the shooting that he initially pulled Castile over as he thought he matched the description of a suspect in a gas-station robbery he had responded to a week prior to the shooting.
Yanez said he smelled the odor of "burnt" marijuana in Castile's car as he walked up to the driver's side window. He didn't tell Castile that he smelled the marijuana at first because he didn't want Castile to "react in a defensive manner."
Yanez told Castile that he had a busted taillight.
Yanez asked Castile for his driver’s license and proof of insurance at his driver’s-side window before Castile told him, “Sir, I have to tell you, I do have a firearm on me.” Castile had a permit to carry the gun but never disclosed that to the officer.
Yanez replied, “OK, don’t reach for it then,” prompting Castile to say, “I’m not reaching for it.”
According to Yanez’s squad car audio and video of the shooting, the officer then twice said, “Don’t pull it out.”
So a total of THREE TIMES, Yanez told Castile Not to reach for the gun yet he continued to move around and soon got shot because of his erratic behaviour.
Yanez’s defense team drew attention at trial to THC found in Castile’s system during his autopsy, suggesting it was proof Castile was high during the shooting and was therefore culpable for what happened.
Yanez said he was worried that Castile may be carrying a weapon for protection from drug dealers or others trying to "rip" or steal from him. "It appeared to me that he had no regard to what I was saying," Yanez said. "He didn’t care what I was saying. He still reached down."
Yanez, among several who took the stand, testified, sometimes through tears, that he had no choice but to shoot Castile after he said he saw Castile gripping his pistol in his front right shorts pocket despite the officer’s orders for him not to reach for the gun.
The state argued Castile was trying to access his wallet to hand over the driver’s license Yanez had requested when the officer “jumped to conclusions” and needlessly shot him. It made no sense-said the state- that Castile — who was wearing a seat belt while traveling home with his girlfriend and her small child from the grocery store — would choose to grab his gun and shoot the officer after being stopped for a broken taillight, prosecutors said.
But I suggest perhaps it DOES make sense to reach for a gun IF your are a desperate and stoned felon planning to flee from a cop?
State law allows police officers to use deadly force when faced with a threat to themselves or someone else. The officer’s conduct must be in line with what another reasonable officer would do under the same circumstances.
Had Castile only listened to Yanez’s commands, two experts hired for the defense testified in court, Castile would still be alive. But when he went for his gun, they said Yanez was forced to shoot.
WE all know that Yankees have the right to bear arms but what about the FOR- GOTTEN portion of the Constitution that lets us know the arms being borne are SUPPOSED to be in the hands of a “well disciplined militia”! Founding fathers never planned for armed stoners wandering the streets!
The state has not explained why Castile was carrying his gun while grocery shopping with his girlfriend Diamond Reynolds and her daughter. If in fact Yanez was right in believing Castile was an armed felon then there IS reason for Castile to be carrying the gun for protection and its also valid reason for Castile to be reaching for the gun in spite of being told to sit still THREE TIMES. The state has not explained why Castile was carrying a gun and is it also possible he was carrying it because he was going to buy more Weed and had the gun as assurance he would be dealt with fairly? Or had it for collecting a debt or some such thing?
Anna Garnaas-Halvorson is a teacher from J.J. Hill Montessori Magnet school and was the first witness called by the state. She worked at the school where Castile served as a supervisor of food services. She testified about Castile’s good character and strong reputation within the school community. That’s nice- he has friends at work but he is not the first man who may have had a second life unknown to his colleagues! So cafeteria food supervisor is Castile`s main job with the possibility that armed robber is a side line? But AGAIN, we will never know for sure! He is beyond questioning or prosecution now!
Yanez said he opened fire because Castile was gripping his gun despite orders not to reach for it. Reynolds disputed that. Castile’s wallet was later discovered by medical staff at Hennepin County Medical Center, where he was treated for his gunshot wounds. Hospital staff weren’t able to tell investigators which pocket his wallet was in. Reynolds testified Castile kept his pocket in his back left pocket. His driver’s license and permit to carry were inside his wallet. But testimony says Castile had already handed Yanez his insurance form before the shooting- and since the wallet was still in his pants pocket when he got to hospital then were was he reaching when he was shot? What pocket was the insurance form he produced stored in? Maybe in the same pocket as the gun?
Various cops and fire dept personnel testified that Castile`s GUN was in the right pocket- that right side from which Yanez says he saw something black emerging in Castile`s right hand. Yanez obviously DID see the gun in Castile`s pants pocket and was right to be concerned when Castile did not follow instructions!
During her cross-examination, Reynolds testified that she and Castile regularly smoked marijuana and that she had smoked it on the day of the shooting. She also said they had marijuana in the car when they got pulled over, but that it was under her seat. Authorities found it inside a closed plastic bag tucked inside a jar on top of her seat. The jar’s lid was off.
Cops found 6 grams of Weed in the car. AS Castile HAD THC in his system at the time of death and as Reynolds has admitted they smoked up often and that she had smoked up earlier that day it seems pretty fair to say Castile was STONED at the time of the shooting! The ONLY questions are HOW MUCH Castile smoked and WHEN! How stoned was he?
Juan Toran was the Roseville police officer who responded to the shooting that night. He was the third cop to get to the scene and arrived when Yanez still had his gun pointed inside Castile’s car.
It was when they turned Castile’s body to place him on a backboard that he (Toran) says he saw Castile’s black semi-automatic handgun sliding out of his right front pocket. Toran said he removed it the rest of the way and placed it on the pavement in a safe location. He guarded the firearm until the scene was taped off.
James Diehl is an instructor at Total Defense gun range in Ramsey, Minn., where Castile took his permit-to-carry class before acquiring his gun permit. He testified that it’s illegal to use marijuana and carry a firearm and also for an applicant to lie on a federal permit-to-carry application about use of illegal substances. The defense alleged at trial that Castile lied about his marijuana use when he applied for his permit and therefore he acquired it illegally. Telling a little fib about Weed use is hardly unique in our modern culture. The real point is that Castile WAS STONED at the time of his death and how much it impaired his judgement?
Diehl also testified that he instructs his students to first tell officers during traffic stops that they have a permit to carry before disclosing that they have the firearm. Relaying information in reverse order could “affect (an officer’s) mind-set,” Diehl testified during cross examination,
In other testimony, James Diehl said he teaches students that, when they’re pulled over by police, first to tell officers they have a permit to carry. Then they should say they have a firearm on them, Diehl said. He said he also tells them to follow all police commands while keeping their hands visible.
“Why is that?” Gray asked.
“Mentioning you have a firearm before you say you have a permit could affect the officer’s (mind-set),” Diehl said.
“And lead to chaos?” Gray asked.
“Correct,” Diehl replied.
So the expert with experience HAS tried to warn Castile about the sort of trouble he can get into while wandering in public with a gun! And Castile was sober enough to remember SOME of his training-he did tell Yanez he had a gun but did Not sit quietly and keep his hands in plain sight. Instead Castile IGNORED three commands NOT to reach for the gun and got shot for it. Diehl also explained that under Minnesota law, a citizen does not have to tell a cop he is carrying a gun- but its not a stretch to think that Castile told Yanez about the gun because Yanez could see the outline of it in his pants pocket and figured it would be best to admit the truth? Or should we just assume Castile was stoned and not to sure what he was saying and ran into foolish trouble?
Emanuel Kapelsohn was one of a number of experts hired by both sides to testify about use of force training and related matters. Kapelsohn said it would have taken Castile three-tenths of a second to remove his gun from his pocket, versus five-tenths of a second for Yanez to react to that threat. That means that if Yanez is telling the truth about what he saw, the officer could have been shot and killed had he not responded immediately to Castile’s grip on his gun, Kapelsohn said.
This statement by Kapelsohn was dissected and disputed with no hard conclusion being reached. What we CAN be sure of is that in the sort of quick draw contest described in court- with Castile drawing his gun and Yanez responding ONLY AFTER he clearly saw Castile`s gun, it would be a VERY CLOSE contest- with NO guarantee that Yanez would come out alive. The odds presented by the experts seem to show that in that quick draw contest, the odds were more in favour of Castile and that Yanez saved his own life by shooting first rather than simply responding to movement by Castile. And THAT reaction by Yanez IS part of police training!
Other key points were made by Kapelsohn Friday morning related to the level of danger Yanez placed Castile’s girlfriend and young child in when he opened fire into Castile’s vehicle.
Had Yanez not shot, Kapelsohn said, a gunfight could have erupted between Castile, Yanez and possibly Yanez’s police partner- Kauser- who was coming up on the other side of Castile’s vehicle that night.
Instead of retreating to a safer position for himself, he added that Yanez remained at Castile’s window so he could point down and to the left to avoid injury to the other passengers in the car. “Yanez endangered himself to try and make it less dangerous for the two other people involved,” Kapelsohn said.
Another `use of force` expert suggested that Yanez should have de-escalated and disengaged from the scene by stepping away but that seems like nonsense. He was totally exposed in the street with no immediate place to hide and no guarantee that Castile would not shoot at him as he backed away.
Further, as Castile was stoned to some degree- we can only say he was not in a condition to be driving and that if Yanez had let him flee the scene it might have resulted in a car crash and more trouble! Then there is the added issue of asking this: if Yanez decided not confront Castile at that time about the armed felon suspicions because of the presence of the woman and child; then WHEN WOULD be a good time for a confrontation? Would cop haters have been any happier of cops had shown up at the school cafeteria where Castile worked-surrounded by kids- so they could arrest him there? That is the ugly side of police work- our cities are BUSY places and there are always innocent victims in the way!
Yanez was simply doing his job in seeking out a person he believed might be an armed felon. That Castile appeared to be too stoned to deal with the matter in a sensible way is NOT the fault of cops and does NOT indicate bigotry! The various `experts` agreed at trial, that if Castile had followed police instructions and his firearm training and kept his hands on the steering wheel he would be alive today. If he had been sensible, he would have left the gun at home. If he had been MORE sensible, he would not have driven the car in his stoned condition.
And if Castile lived in a country where the full and complete truth was told in open court and NOT then subject to cutting and editing by LIE-beral loving sensation seeking news media; and if we did NOT have a LIE-beral govt so desperate to cling to power that they would rather pluck out their own eyes than say anything bad about a doped up ethnic stoner, then we might not be literally throwing gasoline on the bonfire ignited by Black Lives Matter reverse bigots!
And what of the govt choice to pay the Castile family three million dollars for their pain and suffering? Since when did the govt start writing life insurance policies for armed and stupid stoners?
And it was also decided by govt that Yanez should be offered a deal to encourage HIM to leave the police force and this does seem necessary since he would forever after be a lightning rod for trouble- whether deserved or otherwise. So he was paid to take his family and leave town and you have to figure HIS payment was also in the millions in exchange for being BRIBED to slink away and not make a fuss simply because he defended himself from an armed and foolish stoner? AFTER being declared NOT GUILTY!
And is it not interesting that of the 12 jury members, 2 were black and from the start of jury deliberations they are reported to have supported Yanez! Some black people do see very clearly how the law should work! Some black people do work as store clerks and understand the issues and RISKS quite well!
Last year, the Toronto (Red) Star newspaper told us that a typical Cdn lawyer defending a client accused of murder gets paid about half a million dollars- with at least that much more going to the prosecution. Then add in all the other costs for bailiffs and court reporters and added security for such a sensational trial and lost work from the hundreds of candidates ordered to appear for possible jury selection and you have how many more hundreds of thousands in costs? So a million dollars or maybe two million for the trial and lawyers and assorted experts, plus at least five million and maybe 6 -7 million to deal with the pain and suffering of the Castile and Yanez families and you have a bill of between 6 and 10 million dollars and all because some stoner could not go out for groceries without his gun and ran into some cop who was just doing his job in hunting an armed felon!
And hey- T-gurly- we all KNOW how loud you would scream if some armed thug stole your computer! And we know how quickly you would be on the phone to the cops you hate- to urge them find and punish those who threatened you and cut off your propaganda disseminating lifeline! And if they could not find it you are just the kind of guy to assume they are racists and don’t care about your stolen property! And if they DO find it, then you will go right back to throwing mud at them! Such behaviour is called HYPOCRISY!
The Yanez shooting is the natural result of letting stoners wander around in public with guns! Guns and drugs do NOT mix! U.S. gun law forbids a stoner from carrying a gun because they are not in their right and careful minds while stoned. U.S. law recognizes that carrying a gun can cause “chaos” in a traffic stop as Diehl the firearms trainer told the court and he stressed the care with which a person carrying a gun should deal with cops. Stoner Castile did virtually NOTHING right in his meeting with Yanez and got shot for being A STUPID STONED THREAT!
:
Oh little T-gurl- you ought to go read YOUR Constitution- the back pages where the amrs are to be borne by a "well disciplined militia"! NOT by a random pack of stoners and drug dealers!