[MDLNB]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I could give an answer to that 2 blades question. IF(?), big (IF) (because I could NOT see one, but I will look harder next time it is run on TV) - - - So, assuming a knife in his LEFT hand as he walked slowly around the front of the car, then we see the grabbing of his shirt as he leans forward into the vicinity of his steering wheel, - then, he is shot in the lower back SEVEN times, - then the shock of being shot and his momentum forward would cause him to drop that knife - that ONE knife. So that answers the ONE knife question, not 2 knives..........But, several questions remain. Could or SHOULD (?) he have been shot in the leg or arm? Should he have been kicked in the back of the leg when he was in front of the car? Or shot in the leg at THAT point. After all they ONLY wanted him to STOP walking away S L O W L Y from the POLICE. HOPEFULLY, they were not thinking then at that point that he NEEDED to DIE for just not stopping. So. that would have been a GOOD time to shoot him in the LEG if that felt they HAD to shoot him. What was in their mind at that point we can never know. Most posts here are convinced that the Police side was justified. But, I am suspicious about something not QUITE making sense in the video of this shooting. I wish the Police had the SOUND part of there cameras turned on. Why was it not? That could have made me understand the situation more. I hope that an investigation or a jury trial would straighten that out. But, I fear that the rush to condemn him will WIN the day?????

Officers are NOT taught to shoot in the leg or arm. That could be potentially dangerous to bystanders and also easy to miss the small moving target. Officers are taught "center mass" meaning vital organs of the body, and also the largest portion and easiest to hit.

[MDLNB]

Originally Posted by Lindsyburnsy

Still trying to figure out why anybody would need to shoot another person 7 times IN THE BACK and then find a knife in the car. Please stop supporting this type of behavior. Our police need to be trained better. This is inexcusable.

I am all for more and better training of the police. Perhaps if this officer was a better shot he would have killed the suspect with one shot. More funding is important instead of DEFUNDING. Seriously though, a moving target and pumping adrenaline makes even the best shooter hard put to hit where they want the bullet to go.

[MDLNB]

Originally Posted by John41

You really have no clue about neutralizing threats in a fluid situation. It appears now the police in the George Floyd incident will be completely exonerated and perhaps sue the Floyd clan of miscreants. The police in the Blake shooting will also be exonerated.

Hallelujah! Chalk up a couple more for the good guys.

[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by jj6426

First of all, in defense of the police, what is wrong with these suspects who don't cooperate with the police? If you're stopped or caught by the police, deal with it. You have no chance otherwise. In defense of the suspect, why shoot him? Why kill him? Why not taser him? Or, in the case of Jacob Blake who was trying to get into his car, why not shoot out his tires? If there is more than one policeman, why can't they grab him and handcuff him? He ( Blake) was stronger than a cop? Than two cops? Although I may be missing something, it seems to me that the cops were just enraged that this guy was fighting them---and they shot him out of anger not as a last means of capturing him. I would love to hear if a policeman agrees with anything I've said.

You've never tried to subdue and individual that doesn't want to be subdued. Why don't you do some research, he was shot with a taser twice. Shoot out the tires and let him drive away with children in the vehicle, brilliant!

[Aloha1]

Originally Posted by Bucco

Boy, have you nailed it.

There may be some, but most third world countries or those who were overthrown began with attacking the press.

You must stop the citizenry from knowing the truth is the precursor to...well, up to us I guess.

But when the press has already been coopted to support only one narrative, then what?

[Aloha1]

Originally Posted by canyonblue

A presidential candidate and his wife personally meet with the family of a man with a criminal record, had an outstanding warrant, is accused of sexual assault, resisted arrest, was tased twice, threatened police with a knife and was shot. The candidate and his wife go and console the family and the guy, while a cop who is shot and killed in the line of duty and his family get no recognition at all. I find this incredible. We live in a very misguided society.

We now know, Blake senior is an antisemite and follower of the bigot, Louis Farrakhan. We also now know that Blake junior has a rap sheet a mile long, broke into his ex girlfriend's home, sexually assaulted her, stole her car and debit card, and had violated a restraining order. We now know there was no "fight" that Blake was breaking up. Another false narrative to go along with "hands up. don't shoot". There will never be rapprochement until there is an agreement to honestly look at the facts devoid of pre conceived ideas and politics.

[MDLNB]

Originally Posted by jj6426

First of all, in defense of the police, what is wrong with these suspects who don't cooperate with the police? If you're stopped or caught by the police, deal with it. You have no chance otherwise. In defense of the suspect, why shoot him? Why kill him? Why not taser him? Or, in the case of Jacob Blake who was trying to get into his car, why not shoot out his tires? If there is more than one policeman, why can't they grab him and handcuff him? He ( Blake) was stronger than a cop? Than two cops? Although I may be missing something, it seems to me that the cops were just enraged that this guy was fighting them---and they shot him out of anger not as a last means of capturing him. I would love to hear if a policeman agrees with anything I've said.

Should have used a choke hold on him. Nah, a bullet should have worked ok. If they would have used their baton or flashlight on him, there would be complaints of abuse. Can't win so you might as well use whatever keeps you safe and worry about the jury later.

[Bay Kid]

It is Blake's parents fault. They should have taught him respect for all people, then the police wouldn't have been called.

[Aloha1]

Originally Posted by Bay Kid

It is Blake's parents fault. They should have taught him respect for all people, then the police wouldn't have been called.

Given the father is a racist anti semite, that scenario was not likely to happen.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Aloha1

We now know, Blake senior is an antisemite and follower of the bigot, Louis Farrakhan. We also now know that Blake junior has a rap sheet a mile long, broke into his ex girlfriend's home, sexually assaulted her, stole her car and debit card, and had violated a restraining order. We now know there was no "fight" that Blake was breaking up. Another false narrative to go along with "hands up. don't shoot". There will never be rapprochement until there is an agreement to honestly look at the facts devoid of pre conceived ideas and politics.

And he is another hero of the blm movement. So sad and pathetic

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by MDLNB

Should have used a choke hold on him. Nah, a bullet should have worked ok. If they would have used their baton or flashlight on him, there would be complaints of abuse. Can't win so you might as well use whatever keeps you safe and worry about the jury later.

As the old saying goes, better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.