Test: Attitudes About An Incident

[Anthony '58]

(08-09-2016, 06:00 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(08-09-2016, 02:44 PM)Mikebert Wrote: It seems the guy shot this kid dead and the cops arrested him for murder.  Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Me too.

I was hoping for responses from the likes of 58 Flat, Classic, Radind, maybe some others. Very curious how they view this in light of the alignments we are seeing in this election year.

'58 Flat died with the old forum.  

But if you have been following me on facebook you would know my answer to this: Instead of blaspheming the national anthem, these NFL players should be going to their state capitols and lobbying for tort reform that would shield police officers and police departments from lawsuits if they "knee-cap" non-firearmed suspects instead of always shooting them to kill, the fear of said lawsuits being why the cops don't knee-cap them now (this I was told by an actual police officer I befriended on a mixed-martial-arts-themed forum many years ago).  In California - presumably where Colin Kaepernick legally resides - with a Democratic governor and Democrats holding lopsided, obstruction-proof majorities in both houses of the state legislature, such tort reform would be an absolute slam dunk to pass.  And with Muslim terrorist traitor Ahmad Khan Rahami (who is a naturalized U.S. citizen, therefore an out-and-out traitor) having in fact been "knee-capped" (and he was armed with a gun!), it would be pretty hard to argue against it - unless of course white legislators are so antagonized by Kaepernick's Jane Fonda-like behavior that they would vote against it, out of pure spite (the way the gay speaker of the state assembly in Colorado has vindictively blocked the passage of Jessica's Law in that state to protest "homophobia").

Obviously if police officers are going to be obliged to "knee-cap" people whenever possible, then imagine how much pressure there would be on rent-a-cops to knee-cap as well?  That should answer your question.