DBC10 wrote:Manocad wrote:Invictus88 wrote:
How is shooting an unarmed man in the back 7 times from a foot away a legitimate shooting? Apparently they tried to taze him. If they were doing that and were a foot away why not just tackle the guy instead of trying to kill him? The officer had a handful of the guy's shirt and decided it was less trouble to shoot rather then holster his gun and tackle the guy.
It's on video... https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2020/08/24/james-causey-kenosha-police-shooting-video-has-public-talking/5625007002/
I'll give you one video clip why and say no more.
That's what can happen when a person reaches into their vehicle. The police cannot assume that everyone is reaching for bottled water or a Snickers bar after they've ignored requests to be compliant.
The biggest difference between those two videos (of which I'm trying to investigate original source since PragerU is iffy at best) the Kenosha officers already had guns drawn at the ready and literally just lets him walk to the car instead, and all 3 just follows him to the driver's side of the car instead of continually trying to de-escalate, this is where the tackling should come in? Then the one officer at point blank unloads as soon as he sits in his car which has Philando Castile vibes to it.
There's a lot of questions that are being raised here. From the video, it looks like nothing was truly done to continue de-escalation besides drawing guns.
That's not to say police are bad, I get it that it's hard work being a police officer in these situations, but when you watch that video, it just doesn't seem right.
The only reason I’m responding is because you insinuated that the source of the video I posted potentially discredits the video. Don’t do that—not in the case of a video like I posted; you can’t fake an entire video. If you want to do that then you have to discredit any video based on the fact that anyone could question the credibility of the source rather than the credibility of the video itself.