22 killed, dozens wounded across several locations in Lewiston, Maine: Live updates

[poorboy]

I’m getting sick of having to go back and quote you. You’re either a bad liar or you struggle to remember arguments you’ve made. It’s hardly changing the narrative when I can quote you.

And like having to write reports, unlike you, I don’t need to google use of force model. I have to abide by it Einstein. Or have you not clued in yet?

So you want to claim you haven’t said untrained civilians will do better in situations where stress is extreme?

You need more training then or refresher training then as you didn't know the Use of Force Model isn't law, Einstein.

 

[Not getting younger]

You need more training then or refresher training then as you didn't know it isn't law.

You’re a boy that plays at being a weekend warrior that’s never been in a situation else you’d have known the effects of extreme stress. You’d have also known untrained civilians…..

You’re also fool enough not to recognize a few things, and change your tune, every time things you’ve said get quoted back at you. But rather than suck it up, make it worse.

As for your latest weak attempt at saving face.

And that despite the fact or in top of the facts police also have to by law, explore alternatives like deescalation and or less lethal. Aka their use of force model

Try using your brain. If they don’t explore alternatives, and just go in hot going hands on or guns blazing. That’s excessive force? Therefore by law, they just can’t execute people.

 

[poorboy]

You’re a boy that plays at being a weekend warrior that’s never been in a situation else you’d have known the effects of extreme stress. You’d have also known untrained civilians…..

You’re also fool enough not to recognize a few things, and change your tune, every time things you’ve said get quoted back at you. But rather than suck it up, make it worse.

As for your latest weak attempt at saving face.


Try using your brain. If they don’t explore alternatives, and just go in hot or guns blazing. That’s excessive force? Therefore by law, they just can’t execute people.

Of course police can't execute people, just like soldiers can't execute people. I clearly said earlier that Police do not have to stop and ask questions before shooting ALL the time. That doesn't mean EVERY time. Shooting someone who just killed 11 and injured 15 people IS proportionate force, so not sure why you feel to need to bring Section 27 up. Very questionable if you are what you say you are. Either that, or you don't know your job.

My story has been very consistent, despite your attempts to warp the narrative.

 

[Not getting younger]

Of course police can't execute people, just like soldiers can't execute people. I clearly said earlier that Police do not have to stop and ask questions before shooting ALL the time. That doesn't mean EVERY time. Very questionable if you are what you say you are. Either that, or you don't know your job.

My story has been very consistent, despite your attempts to warp the narrative.

omg lol.
nah you didn’t say untrained civilians would be better despite your quote above, just like you didn’t imply people should be armed ( You’re a fool if you stake your life in police saving you) just like you didn’t say to basket case that he needed to research the criminal cod better, when he said there’s courts).

So now you are saying “of coarse they can’t just go in hot. They can be charged, and need to follow the model so they can justify their actions. So now you look utterly stupid for implying I don’t know it and your comment to basketcase. Are you retarded too?

You are as consistent as mud…which is apt given your intellect.

 

[poorboy]

omg lol.
nah you didn’t say untrained civilians would be better despite your quote above, just like you didn’t imply people should be armed ( You’re a fool if you stake your life in police saving you) just like you didn’t say to basket case that he needed to research the criminal cod better, when he said there’s courts).

So now you are saying “of coarse they can’t just go in hot. They can be charged, and need to follow the model so they can justify their actions. So now you look utterly stupid for implying I don’t know it and your comment to basketcase. Are you retarded too?

You are as consistent as mud…which is apt given your intellect.

More manipulating by paraphrasing in your own words.

Go back and read what I've written. You are a fool if you stake your life on police saving you. The police mishandled the information flow in the Nova Scotia shooting. A lot less people would have died if the police alerted the public about an active shooter right away instead of being all hush hush and selectively informing people they believed to be at high risk.

My story is consistent.

 

[basketcase]

No, the Criminal Code outlines police justification of the use of force, but again, because you haven't bothered to look at it, you make an outlandish statement.

Do some research. You are showing your ignorance of the laws of Canada.

Sorry but your argument is cops should shoot suspects instead of taking them into custody.

If Lam was a panicky cop, they probably would have passed the SIU for shooting the guy. Instead they realized there was no need to so they arrested him and he went to courts.

 

[basketcase]

I am sick and tired of spoonfeeding basketcase references....

First, references usually means linking to sources. Second, I have a feeling you don't know what a spoon is.

 

[poorboy]

First, references usually means linking to sources. Second, I have a feeling you don't know what a spoon is.

We've been through this many times. Do some work instead of making others do it for you. Your laziness has been well documented.

Your statement in your last post shows you haven't looked at the Criminal Code. Further proof of your laziness.

 

[basketcase]

We've been through this many times. Do some work instead of making others do it for you. Your laziness has been well documented.

Your statement in your last post shows you haven't looked at the Criminal Code. Further proof of your laziness.

Your cluelessness is legendary.

Why do you think the Criminal Code says cops should simply kill suspects when they could safely be arrested?

 

[poorboy]

Your cluelessness is legendary.

Why do you think the Criminal Code says cops should simply kill suspects when they could safely be arrested?

Now you have changed the wording of the original question you were asked.

No, just human and competent. Don't know where you get the idea that cops should shoot first and ask questions later.

You've resorted to being manipulative to get a different answer that favours your agenda. The answer to your original question is still in the Criminal Code that covers Minassian's scenario that you were referring to and many others where the police do not have to ask questions first.

This is why I can say with certainty your laziness has been well documented.

 

[basketcase]

Now you have changed the wording of the original question you were asked.
...

That was explicitly your argument. Sorry if you don't understand what you write.

Here you are telling us that Lam was wrong because he didn't shoot Minassian and then you go on to argue that the Criminal code says he should have.

Have you asked an operational Toronto Police officer about Lam yet? Didn't think so. Lam can spot whether or not someone has a pistol pointed at him from 30 ft away under extreme stress, yet you accuse me of thinking I'm superhuman? You just can't bear to find out the truth, can you? It's as if you haven't even seen the video. Minassian draws out towards Lam several times. You're telling me that Lam could spot that the item wasn't a pistol with all that movement at that distance? Now that is what I would call superhuman. Lam should have shot as soon as Minassian was drawing on him as if he was going to shoot Lam as he had already proven he was willing to kill. Too bad Lam couldn't even if he wanted to because he didn't have a bullet in the chamber according to the rank and file. If you were actually a member of a range somewhere and showed up to shoot once and a while, where police rent for training and were to ask someone about Lam, maybe you would would find out the truth.

In case you weren't aware, most newspapers are left leaning and will find any way to make not using a firearm look good. The Guardian being one of them, which they freely admit. You know, the same media that accused Israel of bombing a hospital and taking Hamas' word as truth without any verification, causing protests and riots around the world.

There was a female Vancouver police officer shot a suspect in the leg a couple of years ago. There were uninformed people out there, just like you would believe who genuinely think she made a split second choice to shoot the offender in the leg. The fact of the matter was she was under extreme stress and missed her centre of mass target. She did the best she could, but those who genuinely believe she aimed for the leg are idiots.

Vancouver BC policewoman shoots armed man....in the leg. - Current Events -Non-political discussion of the topics in the news - City-Data Forum

 

[poorboy]

That was explicitly your argument. Sorry if you don't understand what you write.

Here you are telling us that Lam was wrong because he didn't shoot Minassian and then you go on to argue that the Criminal code says he should have.

Still haven't looked at the Criminal Code I see.

 

[basketcase]

Still haven't looked at the Criminal Code I see.

Still claiming the Criminal code says cops should just shoot suspects they know are unarmed?

 

[MarcoHardOnFire]

So you want to claim you haven’t said untrained civilians will do better in situations where stress is extreme?

Black Badge holders are quite well trained and are even better than the majority of cops.

 

[poorboy]

Still claiming the Criminal code says cops should just shoot suspects they know are unarmed?

You changed the question again.

You still haven't looked at the Criminal Code. If you did, you wouldn't keep asking these questions. Remember, it's both publicly available and free.

 

[basketcase]

You changed the question again.

You still haven't looked at the Criminal Code. If you did, you wouldn't keep asking these questions. Remember, it's both publicly available and free.

You claimed that according to the criminal code, Lam should have shot Minasian and you condemned the cop for not doing it. Thankfully that's not the way cops operate, even in most of the US.

 

[black booty lover]

I love these threads. They get so derailed it's not even funny. Next week when there's another one of these mass shooting in U.S ya'll will be arguing about the same shit....lol.

 

[poorboy]

You claimed that according to the criminal code, Lam should have shot Minasian and you condemned the cop for not doing it. Thankfully that's not the way cops operate, even in most of the US.

You still haven't looked at the Criminal Code I see.

You just can't bring yourself to look at what the Criminal Code says about the use of force by police and Case Law and just go by how you think the police should operate.

The documentation of your unwillingness, or laziness to conduct any factual research continues unabated.

 

[y2kmark]

I love these threads. They get so derailed it's not even funny. Next week when there's another one of these mass shooting in U.S ya'll will be arguing about the same shit....lol.

Here in Buffalo, we had our own mass shooting. Buffalo's representative in Congress (house) was Chris Jacobs (another Repug one percenter elected to fill the seat left vacant when Chris Collins resigned) and he was outspokenly anti gun control. After the massacre on HIS district he became instantly pro gun control. The same happened in Lewiston, Maine - whooda thunk it???

 

[Valcazar]

Good lord people, just link the damn thing