(April 17, 2015 at 4:38 pm)Bad Wolf Wrote:(April 17, 2015 at 3:27 pm)Rhythm Wrote: -ignoring how absurdly rare that an event like that is...and how purile it makes the question in context....I'd call it a tragedy - but nothing that any cop could have or should have prevented in such a manner. Unfortunately (or fortunately, imo) our system is set up so that you actually have to -commit- said crime before that crime can be used as a justification for why the state acted against your interests. Committing some other crime does not immediately invite such wonderment, and I'm appalled at how quickly discussions go from zero to douche whenever this line is drawn in the sand. We could end a hell of alot of crime before it ever occurs if we just let the cops go out on random citizen duckshoots every morning. We don't..because it's a bad idea. It doesn't become a better idea if the citizens being shot have committed some other crime. Or, in this case..rather than shot..run over. Personally, I -do- care that this guy got run over....and I bet you'd want me to care..if it were you.Erm...he did commit a crime, many infact. He set fire to a church, stole a rifle and then preceeded to point it at people and shoot it in the air. Is it a crime to point a gun at a person or do you have to wait till they shoot someone until the law can intervene? I wasn't using the school kid example as justification for what the cop did, I've already said I don't agree with it. But I genuinly don't care that a gun toting pyromaniac got hit by a car.
woulda, shoulda, coulda, you keep saying the same thing. you can't hit someone with a car, or shoot him just because he might do more harm.
I don't get your thinking and Min is right you should care. Cops know they will get away with it and they just keep getting more violent.
