It?s well beyond you, Scott. You will never understand. Ever.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AMCFoudyYxQ
Yeah, because everyone ever released on bail (or even own recognizance) was eventually found innocent.
Like I said...slow your roll.
It?s well beyond you, Scott. You will never understand. Ever.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AMCFoudyYxQ
Yeah, because everyone ever released on bail (or even own recognizance) was eventually found innocent.
Like I said...slow your roll.
I didn't hear any shooting while the car was moving. Just the people in the car yelling, "Are they shooting?"
But you can hear Finicum yelling "You're gonna have to shoot me" when he got out. Sounds pretty damn threatening to me.
And really, if the police wanted to shoot up the car, they would have - see: San Bernadino
You can hear the shooting in the video.
There is a lot wrong with the situation. I personally think the police were in the wrong on this one according to the video. Unless there is something else we have not seen, I do not believe the police were in the right to even be in the situation in the first place. Why were they pulled over? Why were they being held at gun point? Why were they not allowed to drive to the police station? Why were they shot at for just driving away?
Wonder what Trump will have to say?
Hard to say you're wrong, isn't it.
I didn't hear any shooting while the car was moving. Just the people in the car yelling, "Are they shooting?"
But you can hear Finicum yelling "You're gonna have to shoot me" when he got out. Sounds pretty damn threatening to me.
And really, if the police wanted to shoot up the car, they would have - see: San Bernadino
And what is this with the agent showing? Two shots were fired; one appears to have gone through the roof of Fincum's car. Neither hit him, or anyone else.
And again, police pointing a gun at you? Legal
You pointing a gun at the police? Illegal.
Pretty simple concept.
Guess it's not as legal as you thought.
The only part that isn't (potentially) legal was lying about shooting.
Had he just said he was engaging the target for fear of his life or those around him this almost certainly wouldn't be an issue.
Hence why the Oregon State Troopers who shot him aren't facing consequences.
Guess it's not as legal as you thought.
Like shooting someone in the back? You know something about that?
says anything about being charged for discharging his firearm, let alone pointing it at someone (aka assault. You know, what the Bundys are currently on trial for)?
No, it actually isn't 'like' that; this was a legal use of force but covered up during the investigation (that thing that shows they are accountable). It was covered up likely b/c the HRT guy was jumpy and shouldn't have discharged his weapon without a clear target-not that he wasn't justified in using lethal force.
.
So, Dan...What do you think about this guy? Jury found him innocent. Do you believe the gun "just went off?"
I assume you'd be totally cool with this.
Kate Steinle case: Trump in Twitter fury as jury acquits illegal immigrant charged in San Francisco killing
It was covered up because it was wrong. They just got caught. Seems to be a lot of that going on with this case.