NAACP: “Police... have to be more sensitive…"

  • Thread starter Thread starter ezkl2230
  • Start date Start date
E

ezkl2230

Guest
So this guy shows up to a wedding with a loaded firearm after sending threatening messages to his girlfriend and telling a woman at the wedding that he "had a bullet with her name on it." Pastor very prudently calls the police to report his threatening behavior. Officer approaches suspect, asks if he has anything that could hurt him, begins to pat him down, suspect bolts as soon as officer apparently feels the gun in his pocket. He runs down the road toward an approaching vehicle, dropping his gun in the process, stops to pick it up and according to the police, points it at the officer (this is difficult to make out on the lapel cam footage). He picks it up off the road and turns to run again, but by this time, the officer is shooting. Did he plan to approach the vehicle? Was he just going to keep running? We don't know.

What is clear is that:

1. He threatened someone's life
2. He went to the wedding with the means to carry out that threat
3. He told others at the wedding that he intended to carry out his threat
4. He lied to the officer about having a weapon
5. He attempted to flee
6. Rather than leaving the gun on the ground after he dropped it, he recovered it, apparently making a motion that the officer interpreted as threatening.

The pastor who called the police in the first place says the officer did everything right.

The NAACP's reaction? Police have to be more sensitive. They should have allowed him to keep running until there were sufficient officers available to surround him and arrest him (after all, how is one officer going to surround a suspect?), that the officer was too quick on the draw.

The REAL kicker? After the threats and showing up at the wedding with a loaded firearm, some idiot actually still tries to get between the suspect and the officer to keep him from shooting again!

Here's the video. See what you think.

[video=youtube;34VEjO-Wi0s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-ts=1421914688&feature=player_detailpage&x-yt-cl=84503534&v=34VEjO-Wi0s[/video]

Link Removed
 
If you do stupid schit like this (pointing a gun at a police officer) the police will shoot you, that's just common sense. If blacks (and others) would stop doing stupid schit like this, then maybe the police wouldn`t have to shoot so many of them. They do it to them self`s, but are quick to blame others (police) when they get killed.
 
News flash for the NAACP, when blacks stop committing 83% of the violent crime , and stop committing over 50 % of the murders, then the police may stop profiling, and be more sensitive.
 
If you do stupid schit like this (pointing a gun at a police officer) the police will shoot you, that's just common sense. If blacks (and others) would stop doing stupid schit like this, then maybe the police wouldn`t have to shoot so many of them. They do it to them self`s, but are quick to blame others (police) when they get killed.

I'll only correct your first sentence. If you do stupid schit like this (pointing a gun at a someone) the someone will shoot you, that's just common sense. You point a gun at me and either I or the cops will likely shoot you. But you know the NAACP's feelings are that the cops are all racist. That coming from a racist organization to start with.
 
Notice how the INNOCENT guy shot in the stairwell by the NYPD isn't even an afterthought?

Apparently, it's just actual criminals that anybody cares about these days.

Regardless of my well founded distrust for the police, I'm going to pass on joining the NAACP as OSHA for violent criminals.
 
News flash for the NAACP, when blacks stop committing 83% of the violent crime , and stop committing over 50 % of the murders, then the police may stop profiling, and be more sensitive.
This case has nothing to do with who commits more murders, or "profiling".

It's about dummies pointing guns at people and people who ought to know better, enabling them.

If everybody involved had been Tibetan, the same result would have ensued, and indeed SHOULD have ensued.
 
Dear NAACP:
.
Please tell me why blacks are still killing each other in record numbers. What has the NAACP done to reduce these numbers? And if you have time could you please explain why Al Sharpton hasn't been arrested despite owing $5.5 million in back taxes. White men are lead away IN CHAINS for such a thing.
 
What has the NAACP done to reduce these numbers?
NOTHING, because:
  1. It doesn't advance "the narrative".
  2. It would inevitably entail moral judgments by Black people against certain other Black people, which today is apparently as impermissable as a White Southerner denouncing lynching in Alabama circa 1902.
 
The NAACP, Sharpton and Jackson, among many others, are the most racist people today! WHENEVER there is a black person is involved with any white/white Latino they always jump to the defense of the black person without even knowing what happened! Then when the facts come out that their latest "hero" is not who they claimed him to be, the race profiteers then claim that the police are racist and falsify the facts to protect their fellow LEOs.

The NAACP should take the "A" for Advancement out of their logo and insert an "R" for Retard. Because they sure are not advancing any of their people! They are setting each one back.
 
I give that cop kudos.

After he shot the suspect, and the a-hole keeps trying to approach, he is continually polite and respectful to the a-hole. 'Sir, get back!" He's firm, but not once does he use any untoward language towards the a-hole.
 
America to yhe naacp the folks you represent need to follow the friggen law
The REAL question is: WHOM do they represent, Kathryn Johnston or Michael Brown?

By observation, they've switched focus from Black victims of police abuse to Black criminals.
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,523
Messages
610,661
Members
74,992
Latest member
RedDotArmsTraining
Back
Top