Derek Chauvin verdict

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
11,315
4,360
1,743

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
11,315
4,360
1,743
Not trying to be over the top, but the more and more information we get from this story really shows how the initial framing was wrong. The headline for this story should be “HERO OFFICER SAVES ThE LIFE OF YOUNG WOMAN”.
(note: I am assuming the audio is real, but can’t confirm)
https://twitter.com/mattwalshblog/status/1385305451428990978?s=21

Does the girl who was shot have any right to stand your ground protection? These people were at her house and attacking her ? I'm wondering where her rights to protect herself and use deadly force to protect herself in her own home and on her own yard ended.
She did not comply with the officer, and no adult tried to explain to the officer as he got there, what was happening, nothing. He could only go by what he saw and that was a girl about to attack another with a knife and that attacker would not comply.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 
Sep 22, 2011
4,180
2,929
1,743
33
No he didn't. He told the officer he had a cc permit and was carrying in an attempt to be compliant. He wasn't under suspicion. He got pulled over on a DWB charge because he "looked" like a local suspect. He keeps his mouth shut about having a gun in the vehicle and it's likely he is alive today. He was compliant and overshared. His biggest offense was trying to be completely transparent.

If you don't believe me remember his daughter was in the backseat. Before things went down it was a routine traffic stop. There was no reason for him to reach for a gun and endanger his girlfriend and child. That was a bad shoot and the cop was lucky to just lose his badge.
"Dont Reach for it, Dont Pull it out" the officer then reached into the car to try and stop him from reaching, failing that attempt the officer drew and fired. You are not in philando castiles head, people do dumb things that don't make sense all the time. Was it a good shoot? Hard to tell since we don't have body cam, but from what I saw it definitely wasn't criminal, I also dont think it was bad enough to lose his job over, but that's just my opinion
 

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
11,315
4,360
1,743
To determine what exactly happened.
This is a foster home, those kids still living there need to be safe.
To determine if this girl was in the middle of rightfully defending her own life when police arrived.
To understand why the 911 caller mentioned their grandmother was being threatened and roughed up. Who is this grandmother??
The 911 call was about someone trying to stab girls....was this girl a potential victim that got her hands on the weapon and then try to use it to defend herself and others
Did other non residents of the house show up and escalate the situation where people feared for their lives?
I hear you and agree with you that we all don’t have the entire story. It certainly appears from witness accounts that she was the one that started the violence, but I don’t know if that is accurate.

But that doesn’t change the police officers perspective. The new video from across the street shows that she swung at the first girl while the officer was right there and then changed direction and attacked the girl in the pink right in front of the officer. He had to make a split second decision. If she was being victimized it would seem to me she would react differently.

But my main issue remains how our media and politicians sensationalize and divide us.
CNN‘s initial headline was “Black Teen Killed by White Police Officer” as “Derek Chauvin conviction announced”.
‘Daily Kos’s headline was “Black Teen shot, killed at the hands of White Cop”.

Why focus on race? Does anyone honestly believe race played any impact in the outcome? Of course not, but racial division creates sides, scores political points, and webclicks equal dollars.
NBC News went on the air with an edited video and edited audio that left out key pieces of information.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
11,315
4,360
1,743
Why do you assume I think the officer was on the wrong ?

Fyi I think the officer did what he had to do and was forced to take action and did the correct thing
A tragedy for a young girl who lost her life, and in a way a tragedy for the officer who had to make that rapid decision. Even with it being a correct decision, I’m confident there are other things he’d rather live with going forward.
All the law enforcement I know, would honestly rather never have to pull the trigger on their gun for any reason.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

Pokit N

Gent of Good Intent
A/V Subscriber
Sep 29, 2006
8,156
4,721
1,743
42
Lily Lake, IL
NBC News went on the air with an edited video and edited audio that left out key pieces of information.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
The major news networks have told us over and over again what they are. I don't know why people don't believe them. They don't just have a bias, they don't just occasionally make mistakes. They are not interested in telling both sides. They have an agenda. They are open about their agenda.
https://twitter.com/kjdrennen/status/1377338307974111232?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1377338307974111232%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fmedia%2Fnbc-news-lester-holt-truth-fairness-overrated
 

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
11,315
4,360
1,743
NBC News went on the air with an edited video and edited audio that left out key pieces of information.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
The major news networks have told us over and over again what they are. I don't know why people don't believe them. They don't just have a bias, they don't just occasionally make mistakes. They are not interested in telling both sides. They have an agenda. They are open about their agenda.
https://twitter.com/kjdrennen/status/1377338307974111232?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1377338307974111232%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fmedia%2Fnbc-news-lester-holt-truth-fairness-overrated
He's an idiot. And all those that copy edit for, and approve his casts.
Oh wait, that's all of NBC pretty much.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
18,751
20,592
1,743
All my prior points were not about this shot being good or not...it was about knowing the complete Truth. This may very well be tragic story for the person shot....and the officer was not in the wrong
Do you think the officer should have had and used a taser or bean bag shotgun instead of a firearm if one had been available?

I ask only because of this statement by you:

"I can't help but think that a Taser or a few rubber bullets may have saved this girls life."
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
18,751
20,592
1,743
The major news networks have told us over and over again what they are. I don't know why people don't believe them. They don't just have a bias, they don't just occasionally make mistakes. They are not interested in telling both sides. They have an agenda. They are open about their agenda.
https://twitter.com/kjdrennen/status/1377338307974111232?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1377338307974111232%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fmedia%2Fnbc-news-lester-holt-truth-fairness-overrated
I don't recall Edgar R. Murrow always giving two sides "equal weight and merit" during WWII or in his criticisms and reporting on McCarthyism. *shoulder shrug*
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
33,941
10,548
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
Do you think the officer should have had and used a taser or bean bag shotgun instead of a firearm if one had been available?

I ask only because of this statement by you:

"I can't help but think that a Taser or a few rubber bullets may have saved this girls life."
If the officer had his service pistol with the first 2 rounds rubber bullets and then lethal rounds after those in the clip. I would have like to known the outcome if he put two rubber bullets in her back.

I don't know if the outcome would have been different, but I'm willing to bet 2 rubber bullets to the back at that range would have been more than sufficient to make her drop the knife and most likely would have taken her off her feet.

He shot 4 times so I doubt the outcome would have been any different. But I would think 2 shots to the back with rubber bullets may have gone a long way to stopping the aggression, but all the officer would have to do is pull the trigger one more time for lethal. You see how fast he got those 4 shots off.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,875
2,220
1,743
I don't recall Edgar R. Murrow always giving two sides "equal weight and merit" during WWII or in his criticisms and reporting on McCarthyism. *shoulder shrug*
Not old enough to watch the news then. But I think there is little question that the lines between news and opinion has become more blurred over the last few decades. What Holt said was honest, but justifying bias in journalism is not a good thing

There are myriad examples of so-called news stories that intentionally or unintentionally bias the story. I wish there were easy outlets to just get news, but unbiased news apparently doesn’t get ratings. People want to watch news colored by the biases they already have - there is a lot of studies that show that.
 
Last edited:
Jul 5, 2020
803
131
93
58
Broken Arrow
If the officer had his service pistol with the first 2 rounds rubber bullets and then lethal rounds after those in the clip. I would have like to known the outcome if he put two rubber bullets in her back.

I don't know if the outcome would have been different, but I'm willing to bet 2 rubber bullets to the back at that range would have been more than sufficient to make her drop the knife and most likely would have taken her off her feet.

He shot 4 times so I doubt the outcome would have been any different. But I would think 2 shots to the back with rubber bullets may have gone a long way to stopping the aggression, but all the officer would have to do is pull the trigger one more time for lethal. You see how fast he got those 4 shots off.
Interesting alternative, although does that mean you are suggesting the officer shoot twice, then pause briefly to see what happens? Don’t take this the wrong way because I just want to understand your thought process. What if it didn’t work? The innocent party would then be the victim rather than the one with the knife. As you said, he got those 4 shots off quickly which comes from training and adrenaline, so even with 2 rubber bullets what leads you to believe he or she would be able to control the adrenaline and hold up at 2 shots?
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
18,751
20,592
1,743
If your argument is that Journalist have always be biased, you'll get no argument from me.
While that wasn't the totality of my point, I do agree that journalism has had bias....and continues to have bias....from all media sources, left or right, since the beginning of time.

The rest of my point was that journalism isn't a monolithic entity, and that people don't seem to have a problem with bias in journalism when it's biased towards "their" ideas or beliefs. Imagine the uproar if journalist were giving both sides "equal weight and merit" during WWII or after 9/11.

Also, that journalism is and always has been about more than just reporting what is said by the "sides", giving equal merit and weight to both sides, shrugging your shoulders as to what you believe the truth is, and calling it a day.
 
Last edited:

UrbanCowboy1

Some cowboys gots smarts real good like me.
Aug 8, 2006
3,755
1,912
1,743
Phoenix, AZ
If the officer had his service pistol with the first 2 rounds rubber bullets and then lethal rounds after those in the clip. I would have like to known the outcome if he put two rubber bullets in her back.

I don't know if the outcome would have been different, but I'm willing to bet 2 rubber bullets to the back at that range would have been more than sufficient to make her drop the knife and most likely would have taken her off her feet.

He shot 4 times so I doubt the outcome would have been any different. But I would think 2 shots to the back with rubber bullets may have gone a long way to stopping the aggression, but all the officer would have to do is pull the trigger one more time for lethal. You see how fast he got those 4 shots off.
The bolded part is so asinine, I've got to believe you mean it as a joke.
 

UrbanCowboy1

Some cowboys gots smarts real good like me.
Aug 8, 2006
3,755
1,912
1,743
Phoenix, AZ
Interesting alternative, although does that mean you are suggesting the officer shoot twice, then pause briefly to see what happens? Don’t take this the wrong way because I just want to understand your thought process. What if it didn’t work? The innocent party would then be the victim rather than the one with the knife. As you said, he got those 4 shots off quickly which comes from training and adrenaline, so even with 2 rubber bullets what leads you to believe he or she would be able to control the adrenaline and hold up at 2 shots?
You know a post is really crazy if it gets me and @OSUgradndad85 on the same side of an argument. :D
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
18,751
20,592
1,743
If the officer had his service pistol with the first 2 rounds rubber bullets and then lethal rounds after those in the clip. I would have like to known the outcome if he put two rubber bullets in her back.

I don't know if the outcome would have been different, but I'm willing to bet 2 rubber bullets to the back at that range would have been more than sufficient to make her drop the knife and most likely would have taken her off her feet.

He shot 4 times so I doubt the outcome would have been any different. But I would think 2 shots to the back with rubber bullets may have gone a long way to stopping the aggression, but all the officer would have to do is pull the trigger one more time for lethal. You see how fast he got those 4 shots off.
I think that is a incredibly ridiculous position to take because of what happens if instead of a knife, someone had a gun themselves and now the officer is looking at facing off against real bullets with two rubber bullets to start.

I think it is a incredibly, insidiously, asinine position to take that police officers should be meeting imminent, immediate lethal/great bodily injury force (which a knife absolutely is) with less than lethal force.

Would you still be "willing to bet" on those 2 rubber bullets if the girl being assaulted with a knife, about to get stabbed, was a child or wife of yours?
 
Sep 6, 2012
2,456
989
743
Edmond
If the officer had his service pistol with the first 2 rounds rubber bullets and then lethal rounds after those in the clip. I would have like to known the outcome if he put two rubber bullets in her back.

I don't know if the outcome would have been different, but I'm willing to bet 2 rubber bullets to the back at that range would have been more than sufficient to make her drop the knife and most likely would have taken her off her feet.

He shot 4 times so I doubt the outcome would have been any different. But I would think 2 shots to the back with rubber bullets may have gone a long way to stopping the aggression, but all the officer would have to do is pull the trigger one more time for lethal. You see how fast he got those 4 shots off.
Put yourself in the situation. Police enter into situations that are unknown and they are trying to figure the scene out, so they know in what direction they need to go safely. If someone is walking into a unknown scene, with threats of violence. Your the police officer. How comfortable are you walking into a situation with a non lethal weapon. I know you said 2 non lethal bullets in the clip. How long will it take to shoot twice , before shots are coming back at you. Your asking people to put their lives on the line and tying one hand behind their back.
 

PF5

Deputy
Jan 3, 2014
1,109
331
713
why do we not have 'star trek' guns by now? with stun and kill settings (i think)...not trying to make light of shootings, just looking for a solution with tongue firmly in cheek...
Captain-Kirk-holding-the-gun-553648.jpg
 
Sep 22, 2011
4,180
2,929
1,743
33
If the officer had his service pistol with the first 2 rounds rubber bullets and then lethal rounds after those in the clip. I would have like to known the outcome if he put two rubber bullets in her back.

I don't know if the outcome would have been different, but I'm willing to bet 2 rubber bullets to the back at that range would have been more than sufficient to make her drop the knife and most likely would have taken her off her feet.

He shot 4 times so I doubt the outcome would have been any different. But I would think 2 shots to the back with rubber bullets may have gone a long way to stopping the aggression, but all the officer would have to do is pull the trigger one more time for lethal. You see how fast he got those 4 shots off.
I struggle with whether I should respond to this at all, as it seems like you are just trolling at this point but I will give you the benefit of the doubt.
For a rubber bullet to work it has to be large enough to hurt really bad, I dont think a 9mm rubber bullet would be large enough to be effective, normal rubber or beanbag rounds are fired through a shotgun or 40 mm if I am not mistaken, at 9mm it might even penetrate still.
Do criminals keep 2 non lethal bullets in their gun? If you carry a weapon, are the first 2 bullets in your gun Non lethal? Are the first 2 stabs non lethal when you use a knife, how about the first 2 strikes of a hammer to the head. And once again, I implore you to watch some police activity videos, less than lethal tools do not always work and often enrage the person they are used on or make them panic and make a decision that ends their life. I yearn for the day that we have a stun setting for our Phasers that is able to subdue a person immediately with no lasting damage, but we don't have it now. Until that day, we have an armed, drugged up, mentally ill, nothing to lose populace that the police have to deal with in order to keep normal society functioning. As long as that is the case there are going to be people getting shot and killed by police, and as long as a young, poor black males are committing such a hugely disproportionate amount of the violent crime, then a disproportionate amount of the people killed by police will happen to be black. It isn't racism by the police it is them following the crime statistics. I feel there is definitely an argument of how we got here that involves the legacy of slavery, Jim crow and racist policies of the past. but to point at the police and say it is their problem is a massively convenient and equally wrong scapegoating of what is a societal problem that cuts across racial lines that no one, and I mean no one wants to deal with right now.