Revenue officer Sean Groubert faces twenty years of wet pants for trigger happy panic.
Posted on 09/25/2014 10:42:36 AM PDT by redreno
It is clearly time for cops to be told that if they want to work in policing our communities, then they are going to have to take some personal risks.
If they think that the primary directive is that it is better to kill innocent citizens than to risk ever misjudging a risk to themselves, then they are in the wrong business.
“I wonder how many deaths have been caused by seat belt laws?”
Now let’s see, I’m supposed to wear a seatbelt for my own personal safety, but if a cop finds me not wearing mine, he shoots me?
“The cop went completely hysterical - am going to assume that just one of the four shots hit the motorist, begging the question as to where the other three landed at. Like someone else pointed out here, this incident is going to be Al Sharpton bait for ever more.”
We had a similar “incident” (except in this case the driver died) where we live. The two cops fired a total of 25 rounds but could only account for the twelve that hit the “suspect.” The usual ending though, “justified homicide by cop.”
“So for the haters here, does the cop need to be shot, stabbed or assaulted FIRST before he earns the right to protect himself???”
He needs to be THREATENED before he shoots. You can not “protect” yourself from nothing - there needs to be a THREAT. No one threatened the cop in any way.
That may be, but if you are stopped and they ask for you registration and proof of insurance and dive into the glove box as fast as you can move, you will get shot. Black, white, green, or purple, you never move like that.
He could have been a drug dealer with enough drugs in the car to get life without parole. His moving that fast for a gun wouldn’t be out of question in that situation.
Watch the video again and pay attention to how fast he dives back into the car, would you do that?
The cop should be on his way to death row.
So he wasn’t officially pulled over, so basically what this cop did is walk up to a citizen and shoot him. Nice, just what the race baiters need.
South Carolina trooper charged in shooting of unarmed man
The cop is not supposed to be a mind reader but he is supposed to handle the situation properly. The cop did not handle it properly.
Revenue officer Sean Groubert faces twenty years of wet pants for trigger happy panic.
Do we have to choose only one?
So a cops is supposed to be a mind reader and know what the dude was going to do? So for the haters here, does the cop need to be shot, stabbed or assaulted FIRST before he earns the right to protect himself???
I’m just courious
No you’re not.
The cop is supposed to take on the responsibility of evaluating the situation for a threat NOT simply, literally blindly shooting at the first thing the guy does that the cop doesn’t like. This is the facet of the Job that made it noble. Cops were one of us NOT overlords or a hostile occupying force.
What did cops do 50 years ago? They sure as hell weren’t pulling guns and shooting blindly as they are doing more and more today.
Any frightened little Fem can do as this guy did....piss her panties and blaze away.
“they are going to have to take some personal risks”
I’ll second that-and in addition, every police academy providing training might be reminded to tell all their applicants that they are public servants-not the KGB-this is not the f’in USSR-cops are supposed to serve the public, not freak out and shoot someone every time they get nervous...
Because of incidents like these, I fear for my life whenever I encounter a cop, but that doesn't give me a license to shoot first. At least the State of South Carolina did the right thing by promptly terminating this scum.
I don’t know about begging but diving back into the car is not a good idea at all!
Everyone with a lick of sense knows to have license and registration in hand — and both hands on the wheel — by the time the cop walks up to the your window.
Police: Cop was just following procedure.
The cop didn’t handle it properly from the start.
The circumstances of the two shootings are not comparable. Mr. Jones was not rushing the officer and had not punched the officer already in the face.
Once an officer in a stop orders one to perform an action that requires some bodily movement then it is a shooting situation. If the driver moves to retrieve his wallet or to do anything else he is open to being shot. If he doesn't move he is in noncompliance and liable to be shot. The time is coming if we don't get a handle on this when the only rational response to being stopped by a police officer while in your car will be to try to shoot the officer before he shoots you.
Seatbelt violations are serious. The driver could have gotten hurt. He had to be shot, for his own protection. /s
I’m surprised that FR allowed you to post here. You are a disgrace to Humanity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.