GostHacked Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Granny shot at police officers...granny is dead. Police officers fabricated evidence to get the warrant. Any response to this at all? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Police officers fabricated evidence to get the warrant. Any response to this at all? Yes...legal no-knock warrants, even if obtained fraudulently, do not constitute deadly force. It is a piece of paper. Is it OK if granny shoots at the tax assessor, water meter agent, and letter carrier too? The funny part about this whole thread is that many in Canada would say that granny never should have had the gun to begin with. LOL! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
southerncomfort Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Yeah, what was granny doing with a gun in the first place not sure what this has to with politics or Harper, its not making any sense unless it is nothing but a reason to bash U.S. practices Quote
kuzadd Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Nah, you are not winning and not convincing anyone here in this thread on it. The cops started the deadly events buy entering the wrong apartment. That little bit seems to escape you, the cops fudged things up from the start. Wrong on a wrong on a wrong and the cops tried to cover up their mistakes... but still some old woman is to blame for it all. I am calling checkmate. Nonsense....there is nothing to win even in your self proclamation, not to mention your ignorance of the law, municipal liability, and police training. "Mistakes" are part of the occupation...doesn't mean you're supposed to eat granny's bullets without a life preserving response. Granny shot at police officers...granny is dead. Granny hit porch roof repeat Granny hit porch roof all the cops had to do was take the gun away, from this old gal. There is no defence for these guys despite, BC's claims. Quote Insults are the ammunition of the unintelligent - do not use them. It is okay to criticize a policy, decision, action or comment. Such criticism is part of healthy debate. It is not okay to criticize a person's character or directly insult them, regardless of their position or actions. Derogatory terms such as "loser", "idiot", etc are not permitted unless the context clearly implies that it is not serious. Rule of thumb: Play the ball, not the person (i.e. tackle the argument, not the person making it).
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Yeah, what was granny doing with a gun in the first place not sure what this has to with politics or Harper, its not making any sense unless it is nothing but a reason to bash U.S. practices It's just a regurgitated thread from another forum that tries to make the so called "War on Drugs" look silly. Gun toting granny is absolved of any responsibility..natch! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Riverwind Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 The funny part about this whole thread is that many in Canada would say that granny never should have had the gun to begin with. LOL!This is a good example why having a gun can get you killed. If granny had no gun probably would be alive today because she would have either hid or ran out the back door. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
kuzadd Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Yeah, what was granny doing with a gun in the first place not sure what this has to with politics or Harper, its not making any sense unless it is nothing but a reason to bash U.S. practices It's just a regurgitated thread from another forum that tries to make the so called "War on Drugs" look silly. Gun toting granny is absolved of any responsibility..natch! and yet it's about so much more. citizens right to be safe in there own home, protect themselves, corrupt cops, etc., The 'war on drugs' needs no help to look silly, it just is Quote Insults are the ammunition of the unintelligent - do not use them. It is okay to criticize a policy, decision, action or comment. Such criticism is part of healthy debate. It is not okay to criticize a person's character or directly insult them, regardless of their position or actions. Derogatory terms such as "loser", "idiot", etc are not permitted unless the context clearly implies that it is not serious. Rule of thumb: Play the ball, not the person (i.e. tackle the argument, not the person making it).
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Granny hit porch roofrepeat Granny hit porch roof Granny discharged a firearm in the vicinity of police officers while they executed a legal no-knock warrant. Granny got a first hand lesson in police tactics for the application of deadly force. Granny pulled the first trigger. Cops pulled the last. Poor Granny.....maybe she should have shot at Canadian constables instead...nah...same result: DEAD Granny. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
kuzadd Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 The funny part about this whole thread is that many in Canada would say that granny never should have had the gun to begin with. LOL!This is a good example why having a gun can get you killed. If granny had no gun probably would be alive today because she would have either hid or ran out the back door. Baloney! Quote Insults are the ammunition of the unintelligent - do not use them. It is okay to criticize a policy, decision, action or comment. Such criticism is part of healthy debate. It is not okay to criticize a person's character or directly insult them, regardless of their position or actions. Derogatory terms such as "loser", "idiot", etc are not permitted unless the context clearly implies that it is not serious. Rule of thumb: Play the ball, not the person (i.e. tackle the argument, not the person making it).
kuzadd Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Granny hit porch roof repeat Granny hit porch roof Granny discharged a fire arm in the vicinity of police officers while they executed a legal no-knock warrant. Granny got a first hand lesson in police tactics for the application of deadly force. Granny pulled the first trigger. Cops pulled the last. Poor Granny.....maybe she should have shot at Canadian constables instead...nah...same result: DEAD Granny. you continue advocate for corrupt police, and it's amazing. The cops were corrupt, and they knew it, that's why the covered up. no defence, IMO. Quote Insults are the ammunition of the unintelligent - do not use them. It is okay to criticize a policy, decision, action or comment. Such criticism is part of healthy debate. It is not okay to criticize a person's character or directly insult them, regardless of their position or actions. Derogatory terms such as "loser", "idiot", etc are not permitted unless the context clearly implies that it is not serious. Rule of thumb: Play the ball, not the person (i.e. tackle the argument, not the person making it).
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 and yet it's about so much more.citizens right to be safe in there own home, protect themselves, corrupt cops, etc., The 'war on drugs' needs no help to look silly, it just is Tough noogies....Atlanta GA is not in Canada. We shoot people for lunch. Whining about it from Ontario is irrelevant.....clean up your own shooting galleries first. TORONTO (January 16, 2007) - - - The Special Investigations Unit (SIU) is investigating the circumstances of a police shooting that occurred involving officers with the Toronto Police Service (TPS). The incident started at about 2:10 a.m. this morning when the driver of a Red Neon vehicle allegedly refused to stop for police. A description of the car was broadcast to officers. A short time later, an officer in a marked cruiser observed the Neon in the area of Parliament and Gerrard and followed it to King Street. The Neon was traveling westbound on King when it collided with an unmarked police cruiser near King and Bay Streets. Two officers exited their unmarked cruiser and confronted the two occupants in the Neon. As a result of the confrontation, both officers discharged their firearms. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GostHacked Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Is it OK if granny shoots at the tax assessor, water meter agent, and letter carrier too? Do those people carry guns around with them on the job? Do they forcefully enter a persons home to get the reading on the meter? Or do those guys just knock on the door and ask? Those examples are downright shameful to compare to this incident. A No-knock policy can catch theives but in this case an innocent woman is dead for falsely fabricated evidence to obtain a warrent. Again something you seem to miss. This is a good example why having a gun can get you killed. If granny had no gun probably would be alive today because she would have either hid or ran out the back door. They probably would have shot her anyways (speculation won't win this argument it seems) if she ran. OMG SHE IT GETTING AWAY .. TAKE HER DOWN. Police or criminals, if you are forcefully knocking down my door for whatever reason, expect to get hurt. Since I have no idea why the forcefull enterance is needed, but I know that I am in danger and I will protect myself with whatever means I have at my disposal. No gun? I have a nice aluminum bat which works quite well. You also forget the right to protect yourself and your right to be secure in your own home against just this kind of crap. Hey if the guns had batons, there would have ,... ah never mind. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Tough noogies....Atlanta GA is not in Canada. We shoot people for lunch. Whining about it from Ontario is irrelevant.....clean up your own shooting galleries first. Ahhh the-point-the-finger-game now commences. This kind of thing is deplorable in any country it happens in. I hope no one cries for you if you happen to wind up dead for some cops incompitence and negligence. Which, as a cop can have really deadly results. Are you done playing Devil's Advocate now? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Police or criminals, if you are forcefully knocking down my door for whatever reason, expect to get hurt. Since I have no idea why the forcefull enterance is needed, but I know that I am in danger and I will protect myself with whatever means I have at my disposal. No gun? I have a nice aluminum bat which works quite well. Granny had her chance to "hurt" them, and the police had their chance to apply deadly force. Granny lost. Good luck with the bat. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Ahhh the-point-the-finger-game now commences. This kind of thing is deplorable in any country it happens in. I hope no one cries for you if you happen to wind up dead for some cops incompitence and negligence. Which, as a cop can have really deadly results. Are you done playing Devil's Advocate now? I wasn't raised in the sticks of an oil patch....I grew up in Frank Rizzo's Philadelphia, the same Philadelphia that years later burned down a whole city block to kill John Africa's whole family and MOVE organization. Only an ignorant rube would think to point a firearm (or anything resembling a firearm) at the frickin' police, since they have a tactical license to kill. (Gun! Shooter! Bang! Bang!) First rule: Police must see your hands, and they better not be holding a gun. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GostHacked Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Bush Cheney First rule: Police must see your hands, and they better not be holding a gun. Good luck with the bat. So I guess I would have lost either way? Again I must point out and you still have not addressed it. FABRICATED REASONS TO OBTAIN A WARRANT. The cops lied. So in the end, it is their screw up that caused an innocent woman to be murdered. Did they just take that mans word for it? Did they case the place and gather evidence to prove that the now-fabricated proof for the warrent? Seems like the cops really failed in their duties here. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Again I must point out and you still have not addressed it.FABRICATED REASONS TO OBTAIN A WARRANT. The cops lied. So in the end, it is their screw up that caused an innocent woman to be murdered. Did they just take that mans word for it? Did they case the place and gather evidence to prove that the now-fabricated proof for the warrent? Seems like the cops really failed in their duties here. SO WHAT? One does not have the right to shoot at police officers, regardless of the warrant's legality. Would granny be more responsible if the warrant were squeaky clean, but just as dead? You are ignoring the immediate tactical circumstances of the situation....GRANNY'S GOT A GUN AND SHE IS SHOOTING AT US! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GostHacked Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Bush Cheney One does not have the right to shoot at police officers, regardless of the warrant's legality. There was a reason I called checkmate a few posts back. Cops do not have the right to make shit up for a warrant. If the cops really had done their homework and gather legit evidence to obtain a NON-FABRICATED no-knock-warrant then maybe a criminal would be dead and not an innocent old woman. I can beat this dead horse some more, but it looks like you are getting tired of it, just going by the use of a bigger font you are using. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 There was a reason I called checkmate a few posts back.Cops do not have the right to make shit up for a warrant. If the cops really had done their homework and gather legit evidence to obtain a NON-FABRICATED no-knock-warrant then maybe a criminal would be dead and not an innocent old woman. I can beat this dead horse some more, but it looks like you are getting tired of it, just going by the use of a bigger font you are using. Your dead horse tack is irrelevant....police officers are allowed to protect themselves from assault with deadly weapons. I can imagine the court proceedings now: "Well your honor....since I knew that the warrant was baseless and there were no drugs in my house, I felt perfectly justified in shooting at the police officers. GostHacked said it was OK too." Back in the real world, On April 26, 2007, Smith and Junnier pleaded guilty to manslaughter, violation of oath, criminal solicitation, and making false statements. Smith additionally pleaded guilty to perjury.[11] Furthermore, the federal probe into the police department revealed that Atlanta police routinely lied to obtain search warrants, including often falsifying affidavits. {Wiki} Cops are alive...Granny is dead. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GostHacked Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 There was a reason I called checkmate a few posts back. Cops do not have the right to make shit up for a warrant. If the cops really had done their homework and gather legit evidence to obtain a NON-FABRICATED no-knock-warrant then maybe a criminal would be dead and not an innocent old woman. I can beat this dead horse some more, but it looks like you are getting tired of it, just going by the use of a bigger font you are using. Your dead horse tack is irrelevant....police officers are allowed to protect themselves from assault with deadly weapons. I can imagine the court proceedings now: "Well your honor....since I knew that the warrant was baseless and there were no drugs in my house, I felt perfectly justified in shooting at the police officers. GostHacked said it was OK too." Back in the real world, On April 26, 2007, Smith and Junnier pleaded guilty to manslaughter, violation of oath, criminal solicitation, and making false statements. Smith additionally pleaded guilty to perjury.[11] Furthermore, the federal probe into the police department revealed that Atlanta police routinely lied to obtain search warrants, including often falsifying affidavits. {Wiki} Cops are alive...Granny is dead. Nice twist, but you have failed. You just made a case for my points in this thread. Thank you. 'Yes your Honour. Our actions of lying and deceit resulted in the negligence and an innocent woman had died because of it. Even when the cops admitted their mistakes you still want a Jury to decide..... shamefull. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Nice twist, but you have failed. You just made a case for my points in this thread. Thank you.'Yes your Honour. Our actions of lying and deceit resulted in the negligence and an innocent woman had died because of it. Even when the cops admitted their mistakes you still want a Jury to decide..... shamefull. Your ignorance claimed murder: ["The cops lied. So in the end, it is their screw up that caused an innocent woman to be murdered."] ....not so in the end. Try again. Cops alive....Granny dead. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Figleaf Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 This is a good example why having a gun can get you killed. True, if you have a gun at home, chances are the cops will get a bogus drug warrant, and lie about cameras outside your home in order to bash in your door without identifying themselves. (Or fail to notice there are no cameras and wonder if they have the right place). And chances are that they'll gun you down in a hail of bullets so reckless that they injure some of their own. And if you have a gun in your house, the chances are that after pumping you full of lead, they'll handcuff you and leave you dying on the floor of your shattered home (even though they must surely have noticed you are very elderly). Yeah, that was entirely predictable for the poor woman. Interestingly, the victim was the only one who acted legally throughout this disgusting example. Quote
Figleaf Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Granny had her chance to "hurt" them, and the police had their chance to apply deadly force. Granny lost. WTF is up with this? These scumbags planted false evidence in the dead woman's home. Do you think they did that because they believed they had a 'righteous shoot' situation? Hooey. They covered up because they believed they had done wrong. Quote
Wilber Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 You ask if I want all of what the cops screw up legalized? Your question is blurry - if you are asking whether I think that all so called illegal drugs be legalised then YES - if you are asking whether all laws, say against murder, theft, child abuse should be revoked - no. But - last time I checked the SWAT team hasn't beaten down the door of a child molester and shot him to death only to find out they had the wrong address - then proceeding to COVER IT UP.If you can clarify your question I can address it more clearly. Do you agree that what happened in this case ( the op) is certainly tragic and a gross miscarriage of the law? It's not blurry at all, you maintain that because there was an alleged miscarriage of justice in this case that drugs should be legalized. It is therefore reasonable to assume that if there is any miscarriage of justice the law concerned should be abolished. Your only reason for originating this topic is not the behavior of the police in this incidence but your own position on drugs. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
BC_chick Posted June 3, 2007 Report Posted June 3, 2007 Tough noogies....Atlanta GA is not in Canada. We shoot people for lunch. Whining about it from Ontario is irrelevant.....clean up your own shooting galleries first. I love how you always throw out the "only Americans are fit to comment on American activities" whenever you're backed in the corner and you have nothing left to argue. Funny though how that never occurred to you during a debate any time BEFORE you ran out of answers. Oh, btw, I've noticed you don't practice what you preach and even though you only expect American opinions on American subjects, you seem to have opinions about France, Canada, Middle-East, and just about everywhere else in the world. How about a little consistency? Quote It's kind of the worst thing that any humans could be doing at this time in human history. Other than that, it's fine." Bill Nye on Alberta Oil Sands
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.