Posted on 04/10/2024 9:09:26 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
Graphic bodycam footage released Tuesday revealed the chaos that unfolded when plainclothes Chicago cops fired nearly 100 gunshots during a traffic stop last month, killing one young man and leaving another injured.
Dexter Reed, 26, was killed during a March 21 traffic stop in Humboldt Park after officers in an unmarked cop car pulled him over for allegedly failing to wear a seatbelt.
The chaotic footage shows Reed rolling down the window of his SUV and then raising it before refusing to exit his vehicle as five officers scream commands and draw their weapons.
Preliminary evidence showed Reed had fired first at one officer during the shootout on West Ferdinand Street. Four other officers returned fire, the Civilian Office of Police Accountability said in a statement.
“Available preliminary evidence also confirms that officers returned fire approximately 96 times over a period of 41 seconds, including after Mr. Reed exited his vehicle and fell to the ground,” COPA said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Five deep.
A hysterical female is, really, never a great look.
But, for a more detailed account of what happened, go here:
https://secondcitycop.blogspot.com/
“Five cops? Plain clothes cops? Unmarked car?
For a seat belt violation?”
YES! Because in Chicago, Seat Belt violations are the #1 crime issue.
It is imperative that you send at least 5 plain clothes cops in unmarked cars to enforce this obscenely heinous violation.
Of course, the preferred method is a BearCat loaded with a swat team.
> officers returned fire approximately 96 times over a period of 41 seconds <
The guy in the stopped car evidently fired first. So the police were justified in returning fire. And maybe all 96 shots were needed.
Yet a fundamental rule of firearm use is know what’s behind your target. I wonder where all those bullets went.
The media never mentions that Black cops are usually much harder on hood rats then White ones.
Rule no. 1: Never pull over for an unmarked car.
I’ve seen the video. Most of the officers were black.
CC
This is a mob hit. Mobbed up cops were gunning for this guy and the orders didn't come from City Hall.
> Not wearing a seatbelt should NOT be a reason for police to stop, fish or fine any one. <
It’s really odd. In my neck of the woods not wearing a seat belt will get you pulled over. Well, okay.
Yet a motorcycle rider need not wear a helmet. And so most don’t. It would seem to me that a motorcycle guy not wearing a helmet is far more dangerous than a car guy not wearing a seat belt.
96 shots? Reminds me of when sheriff Grady Judd’s deputies were questioned for firing over a hundred rounds at a cop killer hitting him about 70 times. Judd responded to the reporterettes question about why they shot so many times saying: because that was all the bullets they had!!
And then we get to the 96 shots. Seriously?!
Other reports say windows tinted and couldn’t possibly see if seat belt was on. I suspect cops just looking to knock someone over. No seat belt is a pretty chicken..and not smart..pretext to stop a car in the current volatile world,
According to your link to Second City Cop, the guy without a seat belt fired first... 11 times!
When they passed the mandatory seat belt law in Ohio, they said failure to wear a seat belt would never be a primary offense. They changed their minds later.
I went to the site but there wasn't a whole lot more information about the shooting - but besides a lot of guessing it did mention that one of the officers was shot in the wrist.
If the perp did shoot someone, then shooting back makes sense. But. Did the perp shoot him, or one of the scattershooting cops? The Perp was also allegedly a security officer - did he think that these ununiformed people with guns were jacking him? Are police completely untrained in concern for bystanders downrange of their hail of fire?
The most untrained, brand-new Marine knows that you never fire in any direction but exactly at the enemy and he or she knows for sure that if they hit the wrong people, a court-martial awaits.
So, how many people on this forum would be comfortable complying with the orders of five people claiming to be police officers when they are wearing street clothes and riding in an unmarked vehicle ?
It’s practically an episode of The Shield with how fishy this is.
I stumbled upon and watched a YouTube video the other night about a police pursuit in the County of Los Angeles (seems like they’re all quite common and made-for-TV).
But, this suspect was so brazen and reckless in his disregard for others, that I was hoping that the police would shoot his ass to stop the danger he presented!
The pursuit eventually ended and the police did shoot at the vehicle he was in; but I think they used bean-bag (less lethal) shotgun rounds to stop this guy.
And, his mother will be happy to know that he survived the police-shooting! Most people will never encounter the wild shiite that cops encounter everyday!
Well...if they didn’t start shooting immediately, perhaps their intent was not to shoot unless they had to. But, if you think they’re going to murder you, you may as well go down in a hail of gunfire! Maybe this dude didn’t want to go to the joint and be robbed of his manhood, ergo...
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.