TOTALLY GEEKED!

ed11563 wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Pulled up at a quick stop the other day. Two men were in the parking lot. One of them had a gun and was showing it to the other.

No one freaked the fvck out. The police were not called.

According to the illogic on here, they should have been automatically shot since they had a gun in the proximity of other people.

---

It would have been different if they'd done it here, or if they'd looked like gang-bangers, or if one had pointed the gun at another's head.

If they look like YOU then no one thinks of them as armed criminals. Is that your point?

---

So...people should be shot because of what they look like? 

Boy are you proving the rioters right.  That's exactly their issue--people getting shot because of what they look like, and that's exactly what you are advocating.

 

 

---

Can you understand that there's a difference between "advocating" something, vs. recognizing reality? 

 

---

Only if you aren't willing to change attitudes.   

---

What are you talking about? 

---

You buy into and reinforce prevailing stereotypes. 

Flan how can u be bothered by Ferguson and a big ih well shrug for this child?

apparently not many of you have ever been shot (or shot at)--it happens in an instant--you need to consider what goes through someone's mind " in the moment " -- you roll up on a situation like this, it has already been dispatched as something along the lines of " an armed juvenile waving a gun around in a park " ( sic )--so here we are, here's the kid with the weapon in sight ( sans the red tip ), you can say whatever you want however you want, the kid begins to draw the weapon out, you can: ( hopefully ) wait for him to throw it away, set it on the ground, etc. and you've taken one hell of a chance and everyone's alive OR he draws the weapon out and begins to POINT IT AT YOU ( miliseconds, mind you ) and now you're LOOKING DOWN THE BARREL of what appears to be the genuine article and NOW one ( or BOTH ) of you are going to get shot--sure, there may have been alternatives to their method but they were acting directly to contain the threat, to protect innocent kids / bystanders from potential injury / death

keep in mind that there are " kids " killing other " kids " all over the country, all the time, with real firearms

whether they were right or wrong i can't say for sure--i wasn't there--but i can understand their state of mind and i don't think they intentionally murdered that kid--no way

burns07 wrote:

---

apparently not many of you have ever been shot (or shot at)--it happens in an instant--you need to consider what goes through someone's mind " in the moment " -- you roll up on a situation like this, it has already been dispatched as something along the lines of " an armed juvenile waving a gun around in a park " ( sic )--so here we are, here's the kid with the weapon in sight ( sans the red tip ), you can say whatever you want however you want, the kid begins to draw the weapon out, you can: ( hopefully ) wait for him to throw it away, set it on the ground, etc. and you've taken one hell of a chance and everyone's alive OR he draws the weapon out and begins to POINT IT AT YOU ( miliseconds, mind you ) and now you're LOOKING DOWN THE BARREL of what appears to be the genuine article and NOW one ( or BOTH ) of you are going to get shot--sure, there may have been alternatives to their method but they were acting directly to contain the threat, to protect innocent kids / bystanders from potential injury / death

keep in mind that there are " kids " killing other " kids " all over the country, all the time, with real firearms

whether they were right or wrong i can't say for sure--i wasn't there--but i can understand their state of mind and i don't think they intentionally murdered that kid--no way

---

We aren't talking about Joe Schmo coming up a scene.  We are talking about TRAINED professional cops who are taught ways to discern the situation and how to understand a dangerous, immediately lethal situation from one that isn't.  They weren't "looking down a barrel".  The gun was in his pants. 

So, if you are now in fear to even be in possession of a LEGAL weapon, then that is the whole point. And, just think ,when someone has a legally concealed weapon, well then automatically that person must be gunned down because if they are concealing a weapon then of course that is meant for harm and they intend to shoot everyone around them.

burns07 wrote:

---

you're missing the entire point, gaga--the kid was in a PUBLIC park--cops are sworn to PROTECT THE PUBLIC--they were doing their job--regards obama's brownshirts, that sort of nonsense might go over on the east coast but if they tried that here ( or quite a few other places around our country ) those " brownshirts " would be d e a d--dead--believe it

---

 No, you are missing the point.  Again, using your illogic, then anyone who ever carries a weapon on public property--including just walking down the street--is automatically assumed to be a threat, and therefore must be shot.  That's absurd.

 

Plus, as it happens, in this case, there was NOTHING to protect the public from--at least not more than possibly getting their windows shot out (which there is ZERO evidence that is what this kid was doing, but sometimes kids do that). 

burns07 wrote:

---

Again, using your illogic, then anyone who ever carries a weapon on public property --including just walking down the street--is automatically assumed to be a threat, and therefore must be shot.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

again, you're missing the point as well--unbelievable

---

You have yet to make a cogent point, so it's easy to miss. 

 

You want anyone who carries a weapon in any situation--at least on "public" property--to be gunned down.  The gun control nuts must love you.   

burns07 wrote:

---

You have yet to make a cogent point, so it's easy to miss.
____________________________________________

LOL--certainly easy for YOU to miss



You want anyone who carries a weapon in any situation--at least on "public" property--to be gunned down.
_________________________________________________________________________________

LOL--nowhere did i state or imply this--you're leaping to the wrong conclusions as usual--your propensity for doing so gets tiresome

---

You absolutely did.  You said the police had the duty to protect those in a public park.  This kid had possession of a weapon which is the only thing he was doing at the time he was shot--possessing it.  Yet you think he deserved to be shot.

 

What is the difference between this kid and any other person who might be in possession of a weapon?  Nothing.   

I would think someone from Texas would be more supportive of the 2nd amendment.

If they pulled up screaming 'put your hands out" or whatever, I doubt I could even process and react to what they were saying in that time.

msrock wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

When someone starts yelling at you it takes some time to process what they are saying. He was 12. He probably didn't know what to do

---

 He's a menace to society.  Authority means nothing to him.  Normal people get it.  Police don't got time to analyze like you do on a message board. 

---

 Its their job to analyze.  What law did he break requiring the death penalty.