knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:I've watched the videos over and over again and I don't see the point at which Scott directly threatened any of the cops. He wasn't even looking at the cop that shot him and none of the other cops fired their guns. IMO it was a tense situation but had not reached the point where he needed to be shot. He was not pointing the gun at anyone.

It also bothers me that they had to surround Scott just cuz they saw a gun. I'm in Walmart and guys are walking around with guns. There are hunters walking around with rifles here too. What was the particular threat with a guy chilling in his car smoking a blunt even if they did see him with a gun. I actually don't believe they saw the gun initially. Doesn't make sense to light up a blunt and also be holding a gun as you're waiting on your kids and your wife to come back to the car. Why would he unholster his gun from his ankle just to sit in his car smoking?

I think if he did have the gun, he took the gun out after the cops surrounded him. I of course don't know this as fact. It just seems more logical to me.

So if you were a cop and a guy smoking a blunt gets out of the car with gun in hand after you repeatedly tell him to drop that gun..You would wait until he points the gun to you before you decide to take action??

Still don't get why they have to be kill shots. Why not shoot him once to drop him? Why not stun him ... I don't get why we have a system that its either kill or nothing. How hard would it be to put a system or weapon in place that incapacitates but does not kill?

Officers have more weapons than their guns. But you want the officer to disuse a situation where they believe a gun is involved by using a weapon less deadly than the one they are facing? That makes no sense at all.

How about if they shot him and put him down and out for 10 minutes so they can disarm him? Maybe there is nothing good enough on the market right now to do this but there should be. It would save lots of lives. Also, why so many shots? Are they nervous that if they don't kill him he will shoot back?

They have tasers and things that don't involve deadly force, [but we're talking about a situation where they believe the suspect had a gun. Cops are trained to use their various weapons to match up with various situations. The use of a gun would always be considered deadly force, thus why cops are only trained to shoot to kill in the area most likely to end the deadly situation in the torso area. the main issue of shooting to injure is that wouldn't stop any person who is a threat to kill.

They are also trained to try to diffuse a situation, likely why these officers have covered their bases by screaming put down the gun 10 times.

There was no situation and he wasn't a suspect. Using this type of verbiage carelessly creates a false premise to justify these acts.

meloshouldgo wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:I saw the video of the North Carolina shooting..I didn't see a gun but Lamont Scott looked like he had a gun, he was walking like he was holding a gun..He simple didn't look like a person backing away from a conflict...He had an object in his right hand. I can't fault the police here...

His main flaw was not coming out with his hands up and attempting to slowly lay on the ground. I can't speak for the officers but I don't feel that he presented any real tldanger to them. Their were multiple officers. They had taken cover behind their vehicles. The man walked out of the car like they requested. When he turned his head to witness all the different officers present is when they took him as a threat. With all that said was there a need for the multiple guns shots with the shoot to kill mentality? Would a shoulder/leg shot not be a more appropriate action in this instance?

If he had a gun in his hand then this is all moot...Dude had a gun holster around his left ankle around his white socks, I saw it, I slowed, froze, the frame from the police body cam...If he had a gun in his hands, all bets are off...Look at the police officer's point of view..You told him to drop the gun several times, he got out the car with gun in hand and moved around in a manner not to resolve the conflict..Be reasonable...

NC is an open carry state. So the main question is if he had a gun in his hand as he came out of the car. Which even after all this still isn't clear for some reason. He was an open target for multiple police officers who we all behind cover. And while his head and body turned he was shot while never even attempting to move his arms. I can't tell you what was going through his head. He was either looking for conflicted which he had no way out of but death. Or he was scared out of his mind and reacted poorly which resulted in his death. At the end of the day police had way more control over the situation and his life then he ever had over theirs.

I don't understand the argument if he had a gun in his hands then we need to examine his mental state or wait to see if he raises and fire or he is reacting poorly to commands...All that is just crazy to me..Everyone is trying to get home to their family. If I'm a police officer, I'm not trying to find out if his bullets can pierce the car I'm trying to hide behind or if he is upset or medicated etc...If you have a gun in hand and you refuse to drop it and you are backtracking like some one in combat then all bets are off...Put yourself in the situation, If you had a gun and think you life is in danger and the other person has a gun, are you going to shoot him in the leg and see what happens next??

I keep thinking back and forth on this and it's hard to really take clear position. Openly carrying a gun around is completely legal in NC. This person like everyone else knows the police are probably going to shoot and kill him in this situation based on the history of several such shootings this year. Right or wrong what do you expect him to do? If he complies and they still shoot him he didn't give himself a fighting chance. This is the dilemma created in people's mind by unchecked police brutality.

Also it's a failure of the gun laws that allow people to openly carry but doesn't provide the police with proper protocol for deescalating.

I have a concealed weapons license. At no time in my life have I or will I, take it out during a traffic stop, hold it in my hand, then refuse to drop it when asked by several police officers. And you should "expect" everyone in their right mind to do the same. However, I do agree that the process for obtaining a gun is way too easy and needs stricter requirements. It is a sad commentary that it is easier to obtain a gun than it is to obtain a driver's license. Also, police have a ridiculously hard job, but there needs to be more training on how to defuse a situation. Some of these shootings are clearly showing certain officers are just not ready for the stress of a life or death situation.

NC is open carry, so there's no reason for him to hide it. I don't know your ethnicity, but I can see why black people may justifiably fear for their life when surrounded by the police. If you think you are going to be shot (not sure how many points in your life you felt that) you too would try to defend yourself. This man had no idea if the police would let him live assuming he even had a gun in his hands. And when both your wife and the police are screaming different things at you, you can get easily confused in a very stressful situation. The man sitting in his car minding his own business and not breaking any laws, There was no "situation" till the Police went out of their way to create one.

There is nothing to get confused about. The first words out of your mouth are "officer, I have a legal hand gun". Situation diffused

holfresh wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:I saw the video of the North Carolina shooting..I didn't see a gun but Lamont Scott looked like he had a gun, he was walking like he was holding a gun..He simple didn't look like a person backing away from a conflict...He had an object in his right hand. I can't fault the police here...

His main flaw was not coming out with his hands up and attempting to slowly lay on the ground. I can't speak for the officers but I don't feel that he presented any real tldanger to them. Their were multiple officers. They had taken cover behind their vehicles. The man walked out of the car like they requested. When he turned his head to witness all the different officers present is when they took him as a threat. With all that said was there a need for the multiple guns shots with the shoot to kill mentality? Would a shoulder/leg shot not be a more appropriate action in this instance?

If he had a gun in his hand then this is all moot...Dude had a gun holster around his left ankle around his white socks, I saw it, I slowed, froze, the frame from the police body cam...If he had a gun in his hands, all bets are off...Look at the police officer's point of view..You told him to drop the gun several times, he got out the car with gun in hand and moved around in a manner not to resolve the conflict..Be reasonable...

NC is an open carry state. So the main question is if he had a gun in his hand as he came out of the car. Which even after all this still isn't clear for some reason. He was an open target for multiple police officers who we all behind cover. And while his head and body turned he was shot while never even attempting to move his arms. I can't tell you what was going through his head. He was either looking for conflicted which he had no way out of but death. Or he was scared out of his mind and reacted poorly which resulted in his death. At the end of the day police had way more control over the situation and his life then he ever had over theirs.

I don't understand the argument if he had a gun in his hands then we need to examine his mental state or wait to see if he raises and fire or he is reacting poorly to commands...All that is just crazy to me..Everyone is trying to get home to their family. If I'm a police officer, I'm not trying to find out if his bullets can pierce the car I'm trying to hide behind or if he is upset or medicated etc...If you have a gun in hand and you refuse to drop it and you are backtracking like some one in combat then all bets are off...Put yourself in the situation, If you had a gun and think you life is in danger and the other person has a gun, are you going to shoot him in the leg and see what happens next??

I keep thinking back and forth on this and it's hard to really take clear position. Openly carrying a gun around is completely legal in NC. This person like everyone else knows the police are probably going to shoot and kill him in this situation based on the history of several such shootings this year. Right or wrong what do you expect him to do? If he complies and they still shoot him he didn't give himself a fighting chance. This is the dilemma created in people's mind by unchecked police brutality.

Also it's a failure of the gun laws that allow people to openly carry but doesn't provide the police with proper protocol for deescalating.

I have a concealed weapons license. At no time in my life have I or will I, take it out during a traffic stop, hold it in my hand, then refuse to drop it when asked by several police officers. And you should "expect" everyone in their right mind to do the same. However, I do agree that the process for obtaining a gun is way too easy and needs stricter requirements. It is a sad commentary that it is easier to obtain a gun than it is to obtain a driver's license. Also, police have a ridiculously hard job, but there needs to be more training on how to defuse a situation. Some of these shootings are clearly showing certain officers are just not ready for the stress of a life or death situation.

NC is open carry, so there's no reason for him to hide it. I don't know your ethnicity, but I can see why black people may justifiably fear for their life when surrounded by the police. If you think you are going to be shot (not sure how many points in your life you felt that) you too would try to defend yourself. This man had no idea if the police would let him live assuming he even had a gun in his hands. And when both your wife and the police are screaming different things at you, you can get easily confused in a very stressful situation. The man sitting in his car minding his own business and not breaking any laws, There was no "situation" till the Police went out of their way to create one.

If you don't follow the police commands then it's guaranteed you will lose against the cops..If you drop the gun then you have a chance of getting home to your kids..The chioce is not even close...

I totally agree it's the rational choice. But people smoking weed put into a state of sheer panic don't make rational choices.

meloshouldgo wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:I've watched the videos over and over again and I don't see the point at which Scott directly threatened any of the cops. He wasn't even looking at the cop that shot him and none of the other cops fired their guns. IMO it was a tense situation but had not reached the point where he needed to be shot. He was not pointing the gun at anyone.

It also bothers me that they had to surround Scott just cuz they saw a gun. I'm in Walmart and guys are walking around with guns. There are hunters walking around with rifles here too. What was the particular threat with a guy chilling in his car smoking a blunt even if they did see him with a gun. I actually don't believe they saw the gun initially. Doesn't make sense to light up a blunt and also be holding a gun as you're waiting on your kids and your wife to come back to the car. Why would he unholster his gun from his ankle just to sit in his car smoking?

I think if he did have the gun, he took the gun out after the cops surrounded him. I of course don't know this as fact. It just seems more logical to me.

So if you were a cop and a guy smoking a blunt gets out of the car with gun in hand after you repeatedly tell him to drop that gun..You would wait until he points the gun to you before you decide to take action??

Still don't get why they have to be kill shots. Why not shoot him once to drop him? Why not stun him ... I don't get why we have a system that its either kill or nothing. How hard would it be to put a system or weapon in place that incapacitates but does not kill?

Officers have more weapons than their guns. But you want the officer to disuse a situation where they believe a gun is involved by using a weapon less deadly than the one they are facing? That makes no sense at all.

How about if they shot him and put him down and out for 10 minutes so they can disarm him? Maybe there is nothing good enough on the market right now to do this but there should be. It would save lots of lives. Also, why so many shots? Are they nervous that if they don't kill him he will shoot back?

They have tasers and things that don't involve deadly force, [but we're talking about a situation where they believe the suspect had a gun. Cops are trained to use their various weapons to match up with various situations. The use of a gun would always be considered deadly force, thus why cops are only trained to shoot to kill in the area most likely to end the deadly situation in the torso area. the main issue of shooting to injure is that wouldn't stop any person who is a threat to kill.

They are also trained to try to diffuse a situation, likely why these officers have covered their bases by screaming put down the gun 10 times.

There was no situation and he wasn't a suspect. Using this type of verbiage carelessly creates a false premise to justify these acts.

Rookie wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Rookie wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:I saw the video of the North Carolina shooting..I didn't see a gun but Lamont Scott looked like he had a gun, he was walking like he was holding a gun..He simple didn't look like a person backing away from a conflict...He had an object in his right hand. I can't fault the police here...

His main flaw was not coming out with his hands up and attempting to slowly lay on the ground. I can't speak for the officers but I don't feel that he presented any real tldanger to them. Their were multiple officers. They had taken cover behind their vehicles. The man walked out of the car like they requested. When he turned his head to witness all the different officers present is when they took him as a threat. With all that said was there a need for the multiple guns shots with the shoot to kill mentality? Would a shoulder/leg shot not be a more appropriate action in this instance?

If he had a gun in his hand then this is all moot...Dude had a gun holster around his left ankle around his white socks, I saw it, I slowed, froze, the frame from the police body cam...If he had a gun in his hands, all bets are off...Look at the police officer's point of view..You told him to drop the gun several times, he got out the car with gun in hand and moved around in a manner not to resolve the conflict..Be reasonable...

NC is an open carry state. So the main question is if he had a gun in his hand as he came out of the car. Which even after all this still isn't clear for some reason. He was an open target for multiple police officers who we all behind cover. And while his head and body turned he was shot while never even attempting to move his arms. I can't tell you what was going through his head. He was either looking for conflicted which he had no way out of but death. Or he was scared out of his mind and reacted poorly which resulted in his death. At the end of the day police had way more control over the situation and his life then he ever had over theirs.

I don't understand the argument if he had a gun in his hands then we need to examine his mental state or wait to see if he raises and fire or he is reacting poorly to commands...All that is just crazy to me..Everyone is trying to get home to their family. If I'm a police officer, I'm not trying to find out if his bullets can pierce the car I'm trying to hide behind or if he is upset or medicated etc...If you have a gun in hand and you refuse to drop it and you are backtracking like some one in combat then all bets are off...Put yourself in the situation, If you had a gun and think you life is in danger and the other person has a gun, are you going to shoot him in the leg and see what happens next??

I keep thinking back and forth on this and it's hard to really take clear position. Openly carrying a gun around is completely legal in NC. This person like everyone else knows the police are probably going to shoot and kill him in this situation based on the history of several such shootings this year. Right or wrong what do you expect him to do? If he complies and they still shoot him he didn't give himself a fighting chance. This is the dilemma created in people's mind by unchecked police brutality.

Also it's a failure of the gun laws that allow people to openly carry but doesn't provide the police with proper protocol for deescalating.

I have a concealed weapons license. At no time in my life have I or will I, take it out during a traffic stop, hold it in my hand, then refuse to drop it when asked by several police officers. And you should "expect" everyone in their right mind to do the same. However, I do agree that the process for obtaining a gun is way too easy and needs stricter requirements. It is a sad commentary that it is easier to obtain a gun than it is to obtain a driver's license. Also, police have a ridiculously hard job, but there needs to be more training on how to defuse a situation. Some of these shootings are clearly showing certain officers are just not ready for the stress of a life or death situation.

NC is open carry, so there's no reason for him to hide it. I don't know your ethnicity, but I can see why black people may justifiably fear for their life when surrounded by the police. If you think you are going to be shot (not sure how many points in your life you felt that) you too would try to defend yourself. This man had no idea if the police would let him live assuming he even had a gun in his hands. And when both your wife and the police are screaming different things at you, you can get easily confused in a very stressful situation. The man sitting in his car minding his own business and not breaking any laws, There was no "situation" till the Police went out of their way to create one.

There is nothing to get confused about. The first words out of your mouth are "officer, I have a legal hand gun". Situation diffused

Situation diffused? Tell that to the guy shot dead in Tulsa.

So then when the police approached, if he put his hands on the steering wheel and said "officer, I have a legal firearm" that they would have shot him anyway?

knickscity wrote:

Rookie wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Rookie wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:I saw the video of the North Carolina shooting..I didn't see a gun but Lamont Scott looked like he had a gun, he was walking like he was holding a gun..He simple didn't look like a person backing away from a conflict...He had an object in his right hand. I can't fault the police here...

His main flaw was not coming out with his hands up and attempting to slowly lay on the ground. I can't speak for the officers but I don't feel that he presented any real tldanger to them. Their were multiple officers. They had taken cover behind their vehicles. The man walked out of the car like they requested. When he turned his head to witness all the different officers present is when they took him as a threat. With all that said was there a need for the multiple guns shots with the shoot to kill mentality? Would a shoulder/leg shot not be a more appropriate action in this instance?

If he had a gun in his hand then this is all moot...Dude had a gun holster around his left ankle around his white socks, I saw it, I slowed, froze, the frame from the police body cam...If he had a gun in his hands, all bets are off...Look at the police officer's point of view..You told him to drop the gun several times, he got out the car with gun in hand and moved around in a manner not to resolve the conflict..Be reasonable...

NC is an open carry state. So the main question is if he had a gun in his hand as he came out of the car. Which even after all this still isn't clear for some reason. He was an open target for multiple police officers who we all behind cover. And while his head and body turned he was shot while never even attempting to move his arms. I can't tell you what was going through his head. He was either looking for conflicted which he had no way out of but death. Or he was scared out of his mind and reacted poorly which resulted in his death. At the end of the day police had way more control over the situation and his life then he ever had over theirs.

I don't understand the argument if he had a gun in his hands then we need to examine his mental state or wait to see if he raises and fire or he is reacting poorly to commands...All that is just crazy to me..Everyone is trying to get home to their family. If I'm a police officer, I'm not trying to find out if his bullets can pierce the car I'm trying to hide behind or if he is upset or medicated etc...If you have a gun in hand and you refuse to drop it and you are backtracking like some one in combat then all bets are off...Put yourself in the situation, If you had a gun and think you life is in danger and the other person has a gun, are you going to shoot him in the leg and see what happens next??

I keep thinking back and forth on this and it's hard to really take clear position. Openly carrying a gun around is completely legal in NC. This person like everyone else knows the police are probably going to shoot and kill him in this situation based on the history of several such shootings this year. Right or wrong what do you expect him to do? If he complies and they still shoot him he didn't give himself a fighting chance. This is the dilemma created in people's mind by unchecked police brutality.

Also it's a failure of the gun laws that allow people to openly carry but doesn't provide the police with proper protocol for deescalating.

I have a concealed weapons license. At no time in my life have I or will I, take it out during a traffic stop, hold it in my hand, then refuse to drop it when asked by several police officers. And you should "expect" everyone in their right mind to do the same. However, I do agree that the process for obtaining a gun is way too easy and needs stricter requirements. It is a sad commentary that it is easier to obtain a gun than it is to obtain a driver's license. Also, police have a ridiculously hard job, but there needs to be more training on how to defuse a situation. Some of these shootings are clearly showing certain officers are just not ready for the stress of a life or death situation.

NC is open carry, so there's no reason for him to hide it. I don't know your ethnicity, but I can see why black people may justifiably fear for their life when surrounded by the police. If you think you are going to be shot (not sure how many points in your life you felt that) you too would try to defend yourself. This man had no idea if the police would let him live assuming he even had a gun in his hands. And when both your wife and the police are screaming different things at you, you can get easily confused in a very stressful situation. The man sitting in his car minding his own business and not breaking any laws, There was no "situation" till the Police went out of their way to create one.

There is nothing to get confused about. The first words out of your mouth are "officer, I have a legal hand gun". Situation diffused

Situation diffused? Tell that to the guy shot dead in Tulsa.

So then when the police approached, if he put his hands on the steering wheel and said "officer, I have a legal firearm" that they would have shot him anyway?

Hard for a felon to say that since they aren't allowed to legally carry a gun.

Hard to say if your wacked out on drugs also

knickscity wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:I've watched the videos over and over again and I don't see the point at which Scott directly threatened any of the cops. He wasn't even looking at the cop that shot him and none of the other cops fired their guns. IMO it was a tense situation but had not reached the point where he needed to be shot. He was not pointing the gun at anyone.

It also bothers me that they had to surround Scott just cuz they saw a gun. I'm in Walmart and guys are walking around with guns. There are hunters walking around with rifles here too. What was the particular threat with a guy chilling in his car smoking a blunt even if they did see him with a gun. I actually don't believe they saw the gun initially. Doesn't make sense to light up a blunt and also be holding a gun as you're waiting on your kids and your wife to come back to the car. Why would he unholster his gun from his ankle just to sit in his car smoking?

I think if he did have the gun, he took the gun out after the cops surrounded him. I of course don't know this as fact. It just seems more logical to me.

So if you were a cop and a guy smoking a blunt gets out of the car with gun in hand after you repeatedly tell him to drop that gun..You would wait until he points the gun to you before you decide to take action??

Still don't get why they have to be kill shots. Why not shoot him once to drop him? Why not stun him ... I don't get why we have a system that its either kill or nothing. How hard would it be to put a system or weapon in place that incapacitates but does not kill?

Officers have more weapons than their guns. But you want the officer to disuse a situation where they believe a gun is involved by using a weapon less deadly than the one they are facing? That makes no sense at all.

How about if they shot him and put him down and out for 10 minutes so they can disarm him? Maybe there is nothing good enough on the market right now to do this but there should be. It would save lots of lives. Also, why so many shots? Are they nervous that if they don't kill him he will shoot back?

They have tasers and things that don't involve deadly force, [but we're talking about a situation where they believe the suspect had a gun. Cops are trained to use their various weapons to match up with various situations. The use of a gun would always be considered deadly force, thus why cops are only trained to shoot to kill in the area most likely to end the deadly situation in the torso area. the main issue of shooting to injure is that wouldn't stop any person who is a threat to kill.

They are also trained to try to diffuse a situation, likely why these officers have covered their bases by screaming put down the gun 10 times.

There was no situation and he wasn't a suspect. Using this type of verbiage carelessly creates a false premise to justify these acts.

When they looked over and saw a man smoking weed and allegedly brandishing a gun, he became not only the situation but also the suspect. from all accounts they were undercover investigating something else, yet willing to blow their own covers over nothing but a man reading a book. You can choose to believe what you want, but I prefer logic and common sense.

Everybody always criticizes the dead guy for his decisions. Where's the questioning of the decision making by the police? How did they know what he was smoking by looking at him? You use logic and common sense? Does it make sense that the guy would be "brandushing a gun" when sitting and smoking weed in his car? Logical is it?

Rookie wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Rookie wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Rookie wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:I saw the video of the North Carolina shooting..I didn't see a gun but Lamont Scott looked like he had a gun, he was walking like he was holding a gun..He simple didn't look like a person backing away from a conflict...He had an object in his right hand. I can't fault the police here...

His main flaw was not coming out with his hands up and attempting to slowly lay on the ground. I can't speak for the officers but I don't feel that he presented any real tldanger to them. Their were multiple officers. They had taken cover behind their vehicles. The man walked out of the car like they requested. When he turned his head to witness all the different officers present is when they took him as a threat. With all that said was there a need for the multiple guns shots with the shoot to kill mentality? Would a shoulder/leg shot not be a more appropriate action in this instance?

If he had a gun in his hand then this is all moot...Dude had a gun holster around his left ankle around his white socks, I saw it, I slowed, froze, the frame from the police body cam...If he had a gun in his hands, all bets are off...Look at the police officer's point of view..You told him to drop the gun several times, he got out the car with gun in hand and moved around in a manner not to resolve the conflict..Be reasonable...

NC is an open carry state. So the main question is if he had a gun in his hand as he came out of the car. Which even after all this still isn't clear for some reason. He was an open target for multiple police officers who we all behind cover. And while his head and body turned he was shot while never even attempting to move his arms. I can't tell you what was going through his head. He was either looking for conflicted which he had no way out of but death. Or he was scared out of his mind and reacted poorly which resulted in his death. At the end of the day police had way more control over the situation and his life then he ever had over theirs.

I don't understand the argument if he had a gun in his hands then we need to examine his mental state or wait to see if he raises and fire or he is reacting poorly to commands...All that is just crazy to me..Everyone is trying to get home to their family. If I'm a police officer, I'm not trying to find out if his bullets can pierce the car I'm trying to hide behind or if he is upset or medicated etc...If you have a gun in hand and you refuse to drop it and you are backtracking like some one in combat then all bets are off...Put yourself in the situation, If you had a gun and think you life is in danger and the other person has a gun, are you going to shoot him in the leg and see what happens next??

I keep thinking back and forth on this and it's hard to really take clear position. Openly carrying a gun around is completely legal in NC. This person like everyone else knows the police are probably going to shoot and kill him in this situation based on the history of several such shootings this year. Right or wrong what do you expect him to do? If he complies and they still shoot him he didn't give himself a fighting chance. This is the dilemma created in people's mind by unchecked police brutality.

Also it's a failure of the gun laws that allow people to openly carry but doesn't provide the police with proper protocol for deescalating.

I have a concealed weapons license. At no time in my life have I or will I, take it out during a traffic stop, hold it in my hand, then refuse to drop it when asked by several police officers. And you should "expect" everyone in their right mind to do the same. However, I do agree that the process for obtaining a gun is way too easy and needs stricter requirements. It is a sad commentary that it is easier to obtain a gun than it is to obtain a driver's license. Also, police have a ridiculously hard job, but there needs to be more training on how to defuse a situation. Some of these shootings are clearly showing certain officers are just not ready for the stress of a life or death situation.

NC is open carry, so there's no reason for him to hide it. I don't know your ethnicity, but I can see why black people may justifiably fear for their life when surrounded by the police. If you think you are going to be shot (not sure how many points in your life you felt that) you too would try to defend yourself. This man had no idea if the police would let him live assuming he even had a gun in his hands. And when both your wife and the police are screaming different things at you, you can get easily confused in a very stressful situation. The man sitting in his car minding his own business and not breaking any laws, There was no "situation" till the Police went out of their way to create one.

There is nothing to get confused about. The first words out of your mouth are "officer, I have a legal hand gun". Situation diffused

Situation diffused? Tell that to the guy shot dead in Tulsa.

So then when the police approached, if he put his hands on the steering wheel and said "officer, I have a legal firearm" that they would have shot him anyway?

No one knows what they would have done, but recent history has shown it's a very real possibility.

I get it, criminals don't trust cops. But the other side of the coin is that police do not trust criminals

What you don't get, is labeling innocent people as criminals doesn't make the so.

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:I saw the video of the North Carolina shooting..I didn't see a gun but Lamont Scott looked like he had a gun, he was walking like he was holding a gun..He simple didn't look like a person backing away from a conflict...He had an object in his right hand. I can't fault the police here...

His main flaw was not coming out with his hands up and attempting to slowly lay on the ground. I can't speak for the officers but I don't feel that he presented any real tldanger to them. Their were multiple officers. They had taken cover behind their vehicles. The man walked out of the car like they requested. When he turned his head to witness all the different officers present is when they took him as a threat. With all that said was there a need for the multiple guns shots with the shoot to kill mentality? Would a shoulder/leg shot not be a more appropriate action in this instance?

If he had a gun in his hand then this is all moot...Dude had a gun holster around his left ankle around his white socks, I saw it, I slowed, froze, the frame from the police body cam...If he had a gun in his hands, all bets are off...Look at the police officer's point of view..You told him to drop the gun several times, he got out the car with gun in hand and moved around in a manner not to resolve the conflict..Be reasonable...

NC is an open carry state. So the main question is if he had a gun in his hand as he came out of the car. Which even after all this still isn't clear for some reason. He was an open target for multiple police officers who we all behind cover. And while his head and body turned he was shot while never even attempting to move his arms. I can't tell you what was going through his head. He was either looking for conflicted which he had no way out of but death. Or he was scared out of his mind and reacted poorly which resulted in his death. At the end of the day police had way more control over the situation and his life then he ever had over theirs.

I don't understand the argument if he had a gun in his hands then we need to examine his mental state or wait to see if he raises and fire or he is reacting poorly to commands...All that is just crazy to me..Everyone is trying to get home to their family. If I'm a police officer, I'm not trying to find out if his bullets can pierce the car I'm trying to hide behind or if he is upset or medicated etc...If you have a gun in hand and you refuse to drop it and you are backtracking like some one in combat then all bets are off...Put yourself in the situation, If you had a gun and think you life is in danger and the other person has a gun, are you going to shoot him in the leg and see what happens next??

If this is the case then there would no difference in trained experience police and regular civilians. Police officer are trained in the gun range and trained in protocol.

Looking at the body cam footage. It explains why Scott started to back up nervously. Because the police officer with the body cam footage rolled around the car with the gun directed at him after he got out of the car. I believe he is also the officer who took the shots but not 100%.

I mean I don't see what you see Holfresh. I see him backing up from the officer who popped out from behind the car. Officers yell get on the ground. Him turn his head probably to see the other officers on his left yelling at him and immediately shot.

He was shot 5 seconds after exiting his vehicle. His only actions were backing up and turning his head right and left in a nervous state.

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:I saw the video of the North Carolina shooting..I didn't see a gun but Lamont Scott looked like he had a gun, he was walking like he was holding a gun..He simple didn't look like a person backing away from a conflict...He had an object in his right hand. I can't fault the police here...

His main flaw was not coming out with his hands up and attempting to slowly lay on the ground. I can't speak for the officers but I don't feel that he presented any real tldanger to them. Their were multiple officers. They had taken cover behind their vehicles. The man walked out of the car like they requested. When he turned his head to witness all the different officers present is when they took him as a threat. With all that said was there a need for the multiple guns shots with the shoot to kill mentality? Would a shoulder/leg shot not be a more appropriate action in this instance?

If he had a gun in his hand then this is all moot...Dude had a gun holster around his left ankle around his white socks, I saw it, I slowed, froze, the frame from the police body cam...If he had a gun in his hands, all bets are off...Look at the police officer's point of view..You told him to drop the gun several times, he got out the car with gun in hand and moved around in a manner not to resolve the conflict..Be reasonable...

NC is an open carry state. So the main question is if he had a gun in his hand as he came out of the car. Which even after all this still isn't clear for some reason. He was an open target for multiple police officers who we all behind cover. And while his head and body turned he was shot while never even attempting to move his arms. I can't tell you what was going through his head. He was either looking for conflicted which he had no way out of but death. Or he was scared out of his mind and reacted poorly which resulted in his death. At the end of the day police had way more control over the situation and his life then he ever had over theirs.

I don't understand the argument if he had a gun in his hands then we need to examine his mental state or wait to see if he raises and fire or he is reacting poorly to commands...All that is just crazy to me..Everyone is trying to get home to their family. If I'm a police officer, I'm not trying to find out if his bullets can pierce the car I'm trying to hide behind or if he is upset or medicated etc...If you have a gun in hand and you refuse to drop it and you are backtracking like some one in combat then all bets are off...Put yourself in the situation, If you had a gun and think you life is in danger and the other person has a gun, are you going to shoot him in the leg and see what happens next??

If this is the case then there would no difference in trained experience police and regular civilians. Police officer are trained in the gun range and trained in protocol.

Looking at the body cam footage. It explains why Scott started to back up nervously. Because the police officer with the body cam footage rolled around the car with the gun directed at him after he got out of the car. I believe he is also the officer who took the shots but not 100%.

I mean I don't see what you see Holfresh. I see him backing up from the officer who popped out from behind the car. Officers yell get on the ground. Him turn his head probably to see the other officers on his left yelling at him and immediately shot.

He was shot 5 seconds after exiting his vehicle. His only actions were backing up and turning his head right and left in a nervous state.

are we going to keep forgetting that he was holding a gun

newyorknewyork wrote:

Rookie wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

holfresh wrote:I saw the video of the North Carolina shooting..I didn't see a gun but Lamont Scott looked like he had a gun, he was walking like he was holding a gun..He simple didn't look like a person backing away from a conflict...He had an object in his right hand. I can't fault the police here...

His main flaw was not coming out with his hands up and attempting to slowly lay on the ground. I can't speak for the officers but I don't feel that he presented any real tldanger to them. Their were multiple officers. They had taken cover behind their vehicles. The man walked out of the car like they requested. When he turned his head to witness all the different officers present is when they took him as a threat. With all that said was there a need for the multiple guns shots with the shoot to kill mentality? Would a shoulder/leg shot not be a more appropriate action in this instance?

If he had a gun in his hand then this is all moot...Dude had a gun holster around his left ankle around his white socks, I saw it, I slowed, froze, the frame from the police body cam...If he had a gun in his hands, all bets are off...Look at the police officer's point of view..You told him to drop the gun several times, he got out the car with gun in hand and moved around in a manner not to resolve the conflict..Be reasonable...

NC is an open carry state. So the main question is if he had a gun in his hand as he came out of the car. Which even after all this still isn't clear for some reason. He was an open target for multiple police officers who we all behind cover. And while his head and body turned he was shot while never even attempting to move his arms. I can't tell you what was going through his head. He was either looking for conflicted which he had no way out of but death. Or he was scared out of his mind and reacted poorly which resulted in his death. At the end of the day police had way more control over the situation and his life then he ever had over theirs.

I don't understand the argument if he had a gun in his hands then we need to examine his mental state or wait to see if he raises and fire or he is reacting poorly to commands...All that is just crazy to me..Everyone is trying to get home to their family. If I'm a police officer, I'm not trying to find out if his bullets can pierce the car I'm trying to hide behind or if he is upset or medicated etc...If you have a gun in hand and you refuse to drop it and you are backtracking like some one in combat then all bets are off...Put yourself in the situation, If you had a gun and think you life is in danger and the other person has a gun, are you going to shoot him in the leg and see what happens next??

If this is the case then there would no difference in trained experience police and regular civilians. Police officer are trained in the gun range and trained in protocol.

Looking at the body cam footage. It explains why Scott started to back up nervously. Because the police officer with the body cam footage rolled around the car with the gun directed at him after he got out of the car. I believe he is also the officer who took the shots but not 100%.

I mean I don't see what you see Holfresh. I see him backing up from the officer who popped out from behind the car. Officers yell get on the ground. Him turn his head probably to see the other officers on his left yelling at him and immediately shot.

He was shot 5 seconds after exiting his vehicle. His only actions were backing up and turning his head right and left in a nervous state.

are we going to keep forgetting that he was holding a gun

Is that a confirmed fact?

yes, unless you do not believe the police account and think there is a conspiracy in which the police planted a gun with Scott's DNA and fingerprints at the scene