why is shooting criminals running from the police illegal in america? if criminals knew they faced death for running, they wouldnt run and would just submit to capture. and probably wouldnt commit as many crimes
what is so wrong about cops shooting fleeing nigs and spics and whitetrash in the back as they run away from traffic stops etc?
Other urls found in this thread:
Because sometimes police miss.
There is nothing wrong with that. Anyone with a brain can see that.
But liberals don't have that.
well it should be up to their discretion, but they should have the power of law to shoot a fleeing criminal
when criminals get caught, they are smart and run away because they know cops have to physically chase and catch them. if cops were allowed to just start shooting at them, they sure as fuck wouldnt run away putting other citizens in danger
It puts public at danger and you're innocent until proven guilty by a jury my dude. It's not that difficult to figure out.
you can still be innocent until proven guilty and all that. this law would only be for people fleeing cops after being lawfully stopped for some crime
cops should have the full power to bring you in, and yes you are presumed innocent unless the judge and jury prove you guilty. this would be a safer and more efficient legal system
So it's actually death penalty for running away?
also you know that you haven't committed a crime till you have been sentenced by a judge
You have heard of separation of powers?
Because this would require all police to be 100% moral and use correct actions at all times. Or else they can just execute people they don't like and say they ran away.
Because poor people who can't buy things taking stuff from middle class people who can afford things is a big industry in merricuck.
>oy vey stealing is a victimless crime Goldstein insurance has your back
what? no, you haven't been CONVICTED until you are sentenced by a judge. cops have the power to determine you committed a crime and arrest you, that is how the current system works
It's illegal everywhere because (((human rights)))
this is a good point and probably the best argument against this theoretical new law. but in theory, all cops in the future will be wearing body cameras? also witnesses already prevent this from taking place now, i doubt it would happen significantly more if the law was altered.
It's to protect people who don't run away.
Giving cops the blanket right to shoot people in the back is giving them the right to execute people, without trial, whenever they damn please.
That's gestapo.
Brazil wouldn't know what that means
is robbery a human right?
I sexually identify as a robbery
because he dindu nuffins
letting people run away after bailing from a stolen vehicle or vehicle involved in gang driveby shooting is chaos and mayhem. why wouldnt you give police the right to shoot them for running away? all they have to do is stop and comply to go to jail and get processed in court
>police allowed to shoot criminals who run away
>this law is bad for people who DON'T run away
What the fuck are you on about?
>why is shooting criminals running from the police illegal in america?
Fat fucks can't catch up to usain bolts.
Have you even stopped for a second to think about how you'd determine if someone was running away or not when shot?
>stopped to think for a second
>american
Well I guess that answers that.
>why cant the cops just be street executioners.
FTFY
Police (gun drawn on you): turn so your back is facing me, hands on your head!
>pew pew pew
Later in the report: Subject was fleeing so I discharged several rounds into his back in order to attempt to detain him.
>implying
youtube.com
If our cops were allowed to kill these piece of shits Brazil would be much safer.
Police use of deadly force is mostly for self defense. That does not work when they are running away.
Also police miss about 83% of the time when they fire a gun. The chance of hitting another person is a giant consideration as it was in the Reno police shooting of the tard kid with the knifes.
>if criminals knew they faced death for running, they wouldnt run and would just submit to capture.
no, they'd just be shot dead in increasingly large amounts. they already make everything worse by running, do you really think they are mentally capable of understanding the consequences of their actions?
not that I would necessarily object to that outcome though. at some point you gotta ask yourself if it is really worth it to continue protecting someone
both have pros and cons, so both are ultimately flawed.
with time the respective problem of either system will take overhand and people will ask for the alternative instead since its problems look manageable in comparison
history always repeats itself
except witnesses and camera footage would send those cops to jail
Yeah sure how many cops went to jail this year and how many people where shot by the police?
Also you are still dead if he goes to jail
so how do we get rid of ms13 and the gang problem
That's exactly what he said. Until you are convicted, you're innocent, as the conviction proves you're guilty. You can only be punished once convicted. That's why people who serve time before their trial and then are found innocent can successfully sue for money, because they were unlawful punished.
By legalising street executions by police maybe?
I have no idea and this has nothing to do with our discussion
but I want to see what you do when a friend of you is shot by a black policeman because he hates whites and gets away with it
again this would never happen because this theoretical new policy would only be implemented with cameras recording at all times on the police body cams, gun cams, and car cams
Police already has all this?
Also people killed by Police
2016: 1097
2015: 1210
Policemen charged 2015 and 2016: 0