Verdict is in!! Once again, U.S. Courts allow cops to gun down UNARMED Black males posing no threat!

Yes, this teen was unarmed, posing no threat, and running away, I repeat, he was in fact running away fearing for his life in that moment. So the cop obliged him, by shooting him in the back.


Whether a cop is Black White or HISP, can he always trust that the Courts will inevitably affirm him killing Black males?

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/23/us/antwon-rose-officer-acquittal-response/index.html

 

More unarmed whites are killed by cops than blacks. Why no outrage over that? I can guess.

 

Were they unarmed and running away, I repeat, running away from the cop in fear of their lives? Do you think a young kid running away from a cop, poses a lethal-threat??

 

Depends.

 

Since anytime that cops have had to deal with the dregs of society. The only ones that can speak the truth are the ones that were there or if there.

 

It used to be grounds to shoot them.

It should be changed back.

 

Exactly!! Since, 1863!


And that goes for Clarence "Uncle" Thomas clones, as well: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/fbi-white-supremacists-in-law-enforcement

 

Yes, black people that are not vindictive and follow the law are 'Uncle Toms".

 

Did you also scream FOUL! When the courts allowed a black football player to murder a white woman?

 

If there wasn't a conviction in this case, there never will be. It's a travesty of justice.

Let's just make an important note though. Cops shoot white people too, and they have never been convicted for any of those shootings either. It seems like the badge is a licence to kill.

 

What report did YOU read? This was the getaway driver of a car involved in a drive by shooting where the occupants were still armed with 2 guns. The disgrace is that this officer was ever charged in the first place!

 

Damn right, because you expect police officers to confront armed and dangerous criminals because you are too cowardly or selfish to do so yourself!

 

Not really. I'm a superhero (see profile picture and name) I'd stop violent crime if I saw it happening.

 

Yes, he was the getaway driver for a drive-by shooting and posed a threat to the officers and others.

 

Fantasy. Cops live in the REAL WORLD!

 

OJ is not relevant here, sure race played a role in his acquittal but this wasn't a life or death decision carried out in the blink of an eye

 

Maybe, just maybe, the cop did nothing illegal.

Maybe he didn't wake up that morning and say, "I'm gonna go kill a black boy today".

 

Even if it wasn't a justified shoot, all evidence points to "the victim" being a menace to society, and the world is better off for him having been removed from it.

 

Which makes what OJ did even more egregious

 

Run from the cops and watch how fast you get shot

 

This guy was involved in a drive by shooting. He had a pistol magazine in his possession and there were two pistols in the car. Hardly unarmed posing no threat.

 

White armed murderers get arrested with their weapon, often, because racism's cops pretend that they were not a lethal-threat when approaching them to arrest them. This teen deserved the same due process.

So what.

That is irrelevant and speculative, at the moment the cop fired his gun, and the cop's actions prior to the teen running serves as proof that the cop felt there was no lethal-threat.

The cop would've shot them on the, spot, if what you say is meaningful here. A cop fearing a lethal-threat, factually, will not let that lethal threat run away then shoots the threat in the back. If what you say is true, then the suspect facing the cop is more of lethal threat than the suspect running with his back to the cop.

There are many facts here, which prove that your stance is illogical.

 

Yes, unless you're a Caucasoid.

 

White armed murderers get arrested with their weapon, often, because racism's cops pretend that they were not a lethal-threat when approaching them to arrest them. This teen deserved the same due process.

So what.

That is irrelevant and speculative, at the moment the cop fired his gun, and the cop's actions prior to the teen running serves as proof that the cop felt there was no lethal-threat.

The cop would've shot them on the, spot, if what you say is meaningful here. A cop fearing a lethal-threat, factually, will not let that lethal threat run away then shoots the threat in the back. If what you say is true, then the suspect facing the cop is more of lethal threat than the suspect running with his back to the cop.

There are many facts here, which prove that your stance is illogical.