PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: texasag93 on August 10, 2016, 07:37:30 PM
-
http://m.liveleak.com/view?i=833_1470820111&comments=1
(http://m.liveleak.com/view?i=833_1470820111&comments=1)
Seeing this made me cringe.
Who stands in the middle of the road? :o
-
An idiot who gets run over.
-
Idiot lives matter.
-
Idiot lives matter.
To who... besides the idiot???
-
To who... besides the idiot???
I'm not sure it even mattered to the idiot, given that they were standing in the middle of the road on a dark night. That's why we have deer carcasses littering our highways.
-
That woman kept screaming- "Those cops are just sitting over there!!" What did they expect them to do? Join their demonstration? These are the same foul mouthed idiots that were cussing them out 1 minute prior to the guy getting run over. At that point they were probably calling for back up so they could go over there and help the idiot in the street.
-
That woman kept screaming- "Those cops are just sitting over there!!" What did they expect them to do? Join their demonstration? These are the same foul mouthed idiots that were cussing them out 1 minute prior to the guy getting run over. At that point they were probably calling for back up so they could go over there and help the idiot in the street.
With the mob firing shots after the accident, would anyone rush in there?
-
With the mob firing shots after the accident, would anyone rush in there?
In all fairness, from the video it is unclear who is firing shots or where they are coming from. It is very possible that it is someone in the mob all pissed off and acting out, but it is also possible that it is another group that opposes the protesters and ran over one of their members.
Whoever ran that guy over committed murder, or intended to. It's pretty obvious because there is no attempt to slow down or swerve. A deer, or even possum gets more consideration than that. Given the speed in the video, I'm convinced it was murder, but I might be wrong as it's just a video. That person may have had accomplices that may have been nearby ready with guns.
It is also possible that it is a cop firing the shots in possibly celebration, or an attempt to disperse the crowd to resolve the situation. To assume and place blame given the just the video is biased.
-
Whoever ran that guy over committed murder, or intended to. It's pretty obvious because there is no attempt to slow down or swerve. A deer, or even possum gets more consideration than that. Given the speed in the video, I'm convinced it was murder, but I might be wrong as it's just a video. That person may have had accomplices that may have been nearby ready with guns.
I'm glad you'll never be on a jury judging me.
-
In all fairness, from the video it is unclear who is firing shots or where they are coming from. It is very possible that it is someone in the mob all pissed off and acting out, but it is also possible that it is another group that opposes the protesters and ran over one of their members.
Whoever ran that guy over committed murder, or intended to. It's pretty obvious because there is no attempt to slow down or swerve. A deer, or even possum gets more consideration than that. Given the speed in the video, I'm convinced it was murder, but I might be wrong as it's just a video. That person may have had accomplices that may have been nearby ready with guns.
It is also possible that it is a cop firing the shots in possibly celebration, or an attempt to disperse the crowd to resolve the situation. To assume and place blame given the just the video is biased.
"Whoever ran that guy over committed murder, or intended to"
"To assume and place blame given the just the video is biased."
um...
and, what police training tells them to fire shots to disperse a crowd?
-
Whoever ran that guy over committed murder, or intended to. It's pretty obvious because there is no attempt to slow down or swerve. A deer, or even possum gets more consideration than that. Given the speed in the video, I'm convinced it was murder, but I might be wrong as it's just a video. That person may have had accomplices that may have been nearby ready with guns.
I think the driver was texting, or playing Pokemon-Go.
And if that is the case and he didn't intend to kill the guy, he isn't guilty. He was just extremely careless.
-
"Whoever ran that guy over committed murder, or intended to"
"To assume and place blame given the just the video is biased."
um...
and, what police training tells them to fire shots to disperse a crowd?
Since you're hand picking what you want to quote from me, I'll add back what you neatly skipped over-
but I might be wrong as it's just a video.
As to police training, I have a factoid for you. Police officers are human beings. We have not yet created Robocop, so we have to rely on human beings. Human beings are not all that reliable. Cops may be trained one way and yet do another. Do you think this is just impossible?
-
I think the driver was texting, or playing Pokemon-Go.
And if that is the case and he didn't intend to kill the guy, he isn't guilty. He was just extremely careless.
Really? Why do you think that? Even if you are correct, they are still guilty of involuntary manslaughter and felony hit and run. BTW, you left one out, the driver may have been drunk off their ass and never even noticed a mob in the street. Does that make them not guilty too?
-
Really? Why do you think that? Even if you are correct, they are still guilty of involuntary manslaughter and felony hit and run. BTW, you left one out, the driver may have been drunk off their ass and never even noticed a mob in the street. Does that make them not guilty too?
The driver stopped. Watch the video. There was no mob in the street, just one invisible pedestrian. Watch the video.
-
Since you're hand picking what you want to quote from me, I'll add back what you neatly skipped over-
I didn't skip over it. I saw it. You've never trimmed a post to which you are replying?
The point still stands that you assigned blame based solely on the video. Which is kind of interesting since you acknowledge the fallacy of doing so.
As to police training, I have a factoid for you. Police officers are human beings. We have not yet created Robocop, so we have to rely on human beings. Human beings are not all that reliable. Cops may be trained one way and yet do another. Do you think this is just impossible?
Gee... cops are human? wow.... no shit sherlock.
But why would you think a cop was trying to fire shots to disperse the crowd? Does anyone think that would be a smart thing to do?
-
But why would you think a cop was trying to fire shots to disperse the crowd? Does anyone think that would be a smart thing to do?
I don't per say. I just put it out there as one possible explanation for the shots. There are three possibilities. It was one of the protesters, it was one of the cops, or it was a third unknown party. Impossible to tell from the video.
-
The driver stopped. Watch the video. There was no mob in the street, just one invisible pedestrian. Watch the video.
Yep. I watched the video again. He stopped only after he ran the guy over for a few seconds and then drove off. I tried to see the invisible pedestrian, but could only see the guy in the street holding the sign that got run over. You're right, the invisible guy is really hard to see.
-
In all fairness, from the video it is unclear who is firing shots or where they are coming from. It is very possible that it is someone in the mob all pissed off and acting out, but it is also possible that it is another group that opposes the protesters and ran over one of their members.
Whoever ran that guy over committed murder, or intended to. It's pretty obvious because there is no attempt to slow down or swerve. A deer, or even possum gets more consideration than that. Given the speed in the video, I'm convinced it was murder, but I might be wrong as it's just a video. That person may have had accomplices that may have been nearby ready with guns.
It is also possible that it is a cop firing the shots in possibly celebration, or an attempt to disperse the crowd to resolve the situation. To assume and place blame given the just the video is biased.
I certainly hope you were being sarcastic with your last paragraph.
-
I didn't skip over it. I saw it. You've never trimmed a post to which you are replying?
The point still stands that you assigned blame based solely on the video. Which is kind of interesting since you acknowledge the fallacy of doing so.
Gee... cops are human? wow.... no shit sherlock.
But why would you think a cop was trying to fire shots to disperse the crowd? Does anyone think that would be a smart thing to do?
Further, does that EVER happen, in the US, in the 21st Century?
-
Really? Why do you think that? Even if you are correct, they are still guilty of involuntary manslaughter and felony hit and run. BTW, you left one out, the driver may have been drunk off their ass and never even noticed a mob in the street. Does that make them not guilty too?
Do you think we should refrain from humor regarding this event? If so, I respect that.
Otherwise, you must have missed my reference. If you still don't understand, I'll explain. If you do understand but disagree, tough shit.
-
Further, does that EVER happen, in the US, in the 21st Century?
Forget it, he's drunk again. ;)
-
Forget it, he's drunk again. ;)
Really? So cops in this day and age just fire off rounds into the air to "disburse a crowd."
Proof, please. And from the US, not the Middle Eastern nut jobs that fire their rifles into the air with no care as to where the rounds land.
-
Further, does that EVER happen, in the US, in the 21st Century?
I certainly hope you were being sarcastic with your last paragraph.
Didn't say they did or didn't as it was just a theory as to where the shots came from, but can you say with 100% certainty that a cop did not fire their gun just from that video? I don't think you can. Who are the only people in the video that we know for certain to be carrying guns? The cops. I think it is unlikely that they were shooting their guns, but I see no reason that they should be above suspicion based on that video.
-
Didn't say they did or didn't as it was just a theory as to where the shots came from, but can you say with 100% certainty that a cop did not fire their gun just from that video? I don't think you can. Who are the only people in the video that we know for certain to be carrying guns? The cops. I think it is unlikely that they were shooting their guns, but I see no reason that they should be above suspicion based on that video.
Cute. Now you're changing the issue to which I was responding, and looking for absolutes. I can't be absolutely sure my wife's 100 year old grandmother wasn't a terrorist, but I have a pretty good idea.
Anyway, you didn't just suggest that it could have been the cops who were doing the shooting. I would not have disputed that. It was possible.
Instead, you used two fairly bombastic reasons as to why the cops may have been shooting: in "celebration" - seriously??? - or to "disburse the crowd." Again, you can't be serious.
It is also possible that it is a cop firing the shots in possibly celebration, or an attempt to disperse the crowd to resolve the situation. To assume and place blame given the just the video is biased.
-
Really? So cops in this day and age just fire off rounds into the air to "disburse a crowd."
Proof, please. And from the US, not the Middle Eastern nut jobs that fire their rifles into the air with no care as to where the rounds land.
-
Instead, you used two fairly bombastic reasons as to why the cops may have been shooting: in "celebration" - seriously??? - or to "disburse the crowd." Again, you can't be serious.
Sure. Seriously. I like to think that the cops wouldn't just shoot at people, but that's a possibility too. Who knows what happened? I don't, but the cops are not above suspicion.