>>‘Not all orders are lawful; it is somewhat disturbing that your response here is “he ignored orders.”’
>
>[...] You assume apparently this order to stop is “unlawful”. You can’t assume that because you don’t know what happened to instigate this per the article.
No, I was not commenting on the article — I was commenting on YOUR comment. Do you see that thing that looks like a comma with a period hovering above, it’s called a semi-colon and is used to connect two separate thoughts into a single thought. Your spouting off “he ignored orders” as if that alone justified the shooting is disturbing.
>>“not all police are honorable either..”
>
>Did I say they are? Stop jumping to conclusions based on limited writings.
Your above comment, which assumes a legitimacy of authority actually does imply that.
Huh?
I said “ignored orders, HIT WITH A CAR, AND HAD STOLEN ITEMS/ID.”
Stop making it like I said it was OK to shoot for simply ignoring orders.
He was shot AFTER the CAR incident.
The point is, anyway, the Marine is not perfectly angelic. I cannot believe everyone excusing this man with what we do know.
My biggest problem with the cops AS PER THIS STORY (again, articles are always incomplete) - the 1 cop “jumping into the window”. Why? What was he doing - trying to stop the car himself? If not, by what rights did he jump onto someone’s car? That is the weirdest thing here.