$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 127.51

7,556 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
47.6% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
74 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Milwakee Riots rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Steve Cates
United States
Visalia
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Rioters burn down a gas station and chant Black Power after an officer involved shooting with a suspect carrying an semi automatic handgun with a 23 rounds in his gun. I guess this criminal didn't get the memo that those clips were restricted.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Push communities to the boiling point and sometimes they boil over for all the wrong reasons. The rioting is deplorable, the anger understandable.
13 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Shadrach wrote:
Push communities to the boiling point and sometimes they boil over for all the wrong reasons. The rioting is deplorable, the anger understandable.
Is just having a gun (even an illegal one) enough reason to shoot someone?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lone Locust of the Apocalypse
United States
Sandworms USA
Plateau of Leng
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
That is one shitty riot.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Push communities to the boiling point and sometimes they boil over for all the wrong reasons. The rioting is deplorable, the anger understandable.
Is just having a gun (even an illegal one) enough reason to shoot someone?


It depends on the situation. An armed individual suspected of a felony who flees from police *may* be considered an 'immenent risk' to the community and fired upon. It's a judgement call, and you could make the case of bad judgement, but it is hard to argue after the fact unless it is egregious.
6 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Shadrach wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Push communities to the boiling point and sometimes they boil over for all the wrong reasons. The rioting is deplorable, the anger understandable.
Is just having a gun (even an illegal one) enough reason to shoot someone?


It depends on the situation. An armed individual suspected of a felony who flees from police *may* be considered an 'immenent risk' to the community and fired upon. It's a judgement call, and you could make the case of bad judgement, but it is hard to argue after the fact unless it is egregious.
Just wondering, just seems odd that in a country where you have the right to carry guns that having one can be a reason to get shot.

I ma this was a traffic stop, not a felony. Of course at this time we do not know the whole story.

Hell the victim might have been white for all we know.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Fitt
Thailand
Chang Mai
flag msg tools
Shadrach wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Push communities to the boiling point and sometimes they boil over for all the wrong reasons. The rioting is deplorable, the anger understandable.
Is just having a gun (even an illegal one) enough reason to shoot someone?


It depends on the situation. An armed individual suspected of a felony who flees from police *may* be considered an 'immenent risk' to the community and fired upon. It's a judgement call, and you could make the case of bad judgement, but it is hard to argue after the fact unless it is egregious.

I truly think that part of the problem in all these cases [including the stand your ground cases], is the training that says shoot to kill. Never shoot to wound, kill them.

In a stand your ground situation if you are threatened by several people then yes, shoot to kill. But, if there is just one of them and he only has a knife or bag of skittles then why not shoot to wound?

Well, other than to shut up of a witness to what you did.

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jeremy cobert
United States
cedar rapids
Iowa
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Hell the victim might have been white for all we know.


BWHAHAHAH , you finally said something funny ! well played Slater, several years in and I finally found a chuckle in one of your comments.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jeremy cobert
United States
cedar rapids
Iowa
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Steve1501 wrote:
I truly think that part of the problem in all these cases [including the stand your ground cases], is the training that says shoot to kill. Never shoot to wound, kill them.

In a stand your ground situation if you are threatened by several people then yes, shoot to kill. But, if there is just one of them and he only has a knife or bag of skittles then why not shoot to wound?

Well, other than to shut up of a witness to what you did.



Spoken like someone who has watched a few to many action movies.



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Fitt
Thailand
Chang Mai
flag msg tools
jeremycobert wrote:
Steve1501 wrote:
I truly think that part of the problem in all these cases [including the stand your ground cases], is the training that says shoot to kill. Never shoot to wound, kill them.

In a stand your ground situation if you are threatened by several people then yes, shoot to kill. But, if there is just one of them and he only has a knife or bag of skittles then why not shoot to wound?

Well, other than to shut up of a witness to what you did.



Spoken like someone who has watched a few to many action movies.


I don't like action movies that much. I would blame it on watching too many western TV shows in the 50s and 60s. Wyatt Earp always shot the gun out if his hand without even smashing his hand. ;-)

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Cates
United States
Visalia
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The problem with the BlackLivesMatter movement is that there's the assumption of black victim and guilty racist cop. While there might be cases of that which would be deplorable, there is no assumption of innocence until proven guilty.

The family members and friends of the susupect can post all kinds of stuff on social media about how great the suspect was. The police, as part of an ongoing investigation, have to be silent.

The police issued this statement:
milwaukeepolice wrote:
Armed Suspect Shot, Killed by MPD Officer

August 13th, 2016 by milwaukeepolice

A Milwaukee Police officer shot and killed an armed suspect fleeing from a car on Milwaukee’s North Side.

The incident began when two uniformed MPD officers stopped two suspects in a car in the 3200 block of N. 44th Street at about 3:30 p.m. on August 13. Shortly after stopping the suspects, both occupants fled from the car on foot. The officers pursued the suspects, and during the foot pursuit one officer shot one suspect, armed with a semiautomatic handgun, in a yard also in the 3200 block of N. 44th Street. The suspect died from his injuries at the scene.

The suspect is a 23-year-old Milwaukee man with lengthy arrest record. The handgun he was armed with was taken in a burglary in Waukesha in March of this year. The victim of that burglary reported 500 rounds of ammunition were also stolen with the handgun.

The officer is a 24-year-old, male, assigned to MPD’s District 7. He has six years of service with MPD, three years as an officer. He was not injured and, as is standard practice, will be placed on administrative duty during the investigation and subsequent review by the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office.

The Milwaukee Police Department has contained the scene and, pursuant to State Law, the Wisconsin Department of Justice’s Division of Criminal Investigation has been contacted to lead the investigation.

That's all we'll get for a month or so.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything.
mbmbmbmbmb
ironcates wrote:
The problem with the BlackLivesMatter movement is that there's the assumption of black victim and guilty racist cop.

It seems to go much further than that to me. Even in cases of clear guilt and the officer reacting reasonable, BLM etc has never once admitted they were wrong. As far as BLM is concerned black men don't commit crimes and police officers can't make honest mistakes. Even getting them to admit to that would be an amazing breakthrough, much less getting them to admit that blacks commit far more violent crimes than whites on a per capita basis.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pontifex Maximus
United States
CA
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sfox wrote:
ironcates wrote:
The problem with the BlackLivesMatter movement is that there's the assumption of black victim and guilty racist cop.

It seems to go much further than that to me. Even in cases of clear guilt and the officer reacting reasonable, BLM etc has never once admitted they were wrong. As far as BLM is concerned black men don't commit crimes and police officers can't make honest mistakes. Even getting them to admit to that would be an amazing breakthrough, much less getting them to admit that blacks commit far more violent crimes than whites on a per capita basis.


Which makes it ok to shoot them in what are really questionable circumstances. Like for instance when the african american is unarmed, hands in the air, and on his back for example?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/21/florida-poli...

As someone pointed out, the only way he could have complied more with the police at that point is if he had shot himself.

Blaming the victim, always a dead end position to take
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BJ
United States
Eau Claire
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
You are full of poisonous refuse and insane foolishness.
badge
I had not supposed or expected your arrogant spirit to seek such a ridiculous and childish reason for lying; you should have better reasons.
mbmbmbmbmb
Shadrach wrote:
Push communities to the boiling point and sometimes they boil over for all the wrong reasons. The rioting is deplorable, the anger understandable.


Ahh yes, the "fake but accurate" Dan Rather excuse. Ridiculous.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ari
United States
California
flag msg tools
La vie est un jeu
badge
Panem et Circenses
mbmbmbmbmb
bjlillo wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
Push communities to the boiling point and sometimes they boil over for all the wrong reasons. The rioting is deplorable, the anger understandable.


Ahh yes, the "fake but accurate" Dan Rather excuse. Ridiculous.
Why is this ridiculous and how is it fake? Crime follows poverty. Poor communities cause us the most problems all over the world. Lack of education and adequate income opportunities have led to these issues.
5 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Steve1501 wrote:
jeremycobert wrote:
Steve1501 wrote:
I truly think that part of the problem in all these cases [including the stand your ground cases], is the training that says shoot to kill. Never shoot to wound, kill them.

In a stand your ground situation if you are threatened by several people then yes, shoot to kill. But, if there is just one of them and he only has a knife or bag of skittles then why not shoot to wound?

Well, other than to shut up of a witness to what you did.



Spoken like someone who has watched a few to many action movies.


I don't like action movies that much. I would blame it on watching too many western TV shows in the 50s and 60s. Wyatt Earp always shot the gun out if his hand without even smashing his hand. ;-)



So having said that, were you serious about "shooting to wound" or just jesting?

Maybe if you're Chuck Norris or a SWAT sniper or something you can "shoot to wound."

But training, for police and civilian alike, is to shoot to stop the threat. And the best way to do that is by aiming center mass. Not for the arm, not for the gun in question, not for the leg, but for the chest. In a tense situation where your heart rate is already up, you go for the biggest area to ensure you hit your target. Not a limb.

8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Fitt
Thailand
Chang Mai
flag msg tools
COMPNOR wrote:
Steve1501 wrote:
jeremycobert wrote:
Steve1501 wrote:
I truly think that part of the problem in all these cases [including the stand your ground cases], is the training that says shoot to kill. Never shoot to wound, kill them.

In a stand your ground situation if you are threatened by several people then yes, shoot to kill. But, if there is just one of them and he only has a knife or bag of skittles then why not shoot to wound?

Well, other than to shut up of a witness to what you did.



Spoken like someone who has watched a few to many action movies.


I don't like action movies that much. I would blame it on watching too many western TV shows in the 50s and 60s. Wyatt Earp always shot the gun out if his hand without even smashing his hand. ;-)



So having said that, were you serious about "shooting to wound" or just jesting?

Maybe if you're Chuck Norris or a SWAT sniper or something you can "shoot to wound."

But training, for police and civilian alike, is to shoot to stop the threat. And the best way to do that is by aiming center mass. Not for the arm, not for the gun in question, not for the leg, but for the chest. In a tense situation where your heart rate is already up, you go for the biggest area to ensure you hit your target. Not a limb.


I'm serious.

I said if their is just one man threatening you and you start shooting and he has no gun; why would he keep coming? And if he does keep coming then shoot to kill as a last resort.

Shooting to kill as the 1st resort is just wrong in most cases.

I know the training is to shoot to kill. I'm saying that that is wrong in a civilized part of a civilized country. I am entitled to my opinion, right?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Steve1501 wrote:
COMPNOR wrote:
Steve1501 wrote:
jeremycobert wrote:
Steve1501 wrote:
I truly think that part of the problem in all these cases [including the stand your ground cases], is the training that says shoot to kill. Never shoot to wound, kill them.

In a stand your ground situation if you are threatened by several people then yes, shoot to kill. But, if there is just one of them and he only has a knife or bag of skittles then why not shoot to wound?

Well, other than to shut up of a witness to what you did.



Spoken like someone who has watched a few to many action movies.


I don't like action movies that much. I would blame it on watching too many western TV shows in the 50s and 60s. Wyatt Earp always shot the gun out if his hand without even smashing his hand. ;-)



So having said that, were you serious about "shooting to wound" or just jesting?

Maybe if you're Chuck Norris or a SWAT sniper or something you can "shoot to wound."

But training, for police and civilian alike, is to shoot to stop the threat. And the best way to do that is by aiming center mass. Not for the arm, not for the gun in question, not for the leg, but for the chest. In a tense situation where your heart rate is already up, you go for the biggest area to ensure you hit your target. Not a limb.


I'm serious.

I said if their is just one man threatening you and you start shooting and he has no gun; why would he keep coming? And if he does keep coming then shoot to kill as a last resort.

Shooting to kill as the 1st resort is just wrong in most cases.

I know the training is to shoot to kill. I'm saying that that is wrong in a civilized part of a civilized country. I am entitled to my opinion, right?




Another fallacy, that if someone doesn't have a gun they can't be capable of deadly force. If someone is twice my size and coming towards me, I am not going to shoot to wound. I'm going to shoot to stop the threat. Furthermore, depending on the situation, if someone is all hopped up on drugs or something gunshots don't always stop them. There have been plenty of reports of people continuing on after taking several shots. And a knife I would say is most capable of lethal force.


Of course you're entitled to your opinion. But your opinion seems more of when is it appropriate to use lethal force, and not how to employ lethal force. Again, if you are in a situation that requires you to draw and fire your gun, you aim to stop the threat. You don't aim to wound. This isn't the movies. This isn't a western.

Now, you are certainly entitled to your opinion and if you truly think that someone should "aim to wound" or if police training should "aim to wound" firce go right for it. But to me, it seems like a poorly thought out opinion, not supported by experts in the use of self defense, hence my initial reply. If you choose to stick with it, well ok. No further discussion needed.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Carter
United States
North Liberty
Iowa
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Steve1501 wrote:
COMPNOR wrote:
Steve1501 wrote:
jeremycobert wrote:
Steve1501 wrote:
I truly think that part of the problem in all these cases [including the stand your ground cases], is the training that says shoot to kill. Never shoot to wound, kill them.

In a stand your ground situation if you are threatened by several people then yes, shoot to kill. But, if there is just one of them and he only has a knife or bag of skittles then why not shoot to wound?

Well, other than to shut up of a witness to what you did.



Spoken like someone who has watched a few to many action movies.


I don't like action movies that much. I would blame it on watching too many western TV shows in the 50s and 60s. Wyatt Earp always shot the gun out if his hand without even smashing his hand. ;-)





So having said that, were you serious about "shooting to wound" or just jesting?

Maybe if you're Chuck Norris or a SWAT sniper or something you can "shoot to wound."

But training, for police and civilian alike, is to shoot to stop the threat. And the best way to do that is by aiming center mass. Not for the arm, not for the gun in question, not for the leg, but for the chest. In a tense situation where your heart rate is already up, you go for the biggest area to ensure you hit your target. Not a limb.


I'm serious.

I said if their is just one man threatening you and you start shooting and he has no gun; why would he keep coming? And if he does keep coming then shoot to kill as a last resort.

Shooting to kill as the 1st resort is just wrong in most cases.

I know the training is to shoot to kill. I'm saying that that is wrong in a civilized part of a civilized country. I am entitled to my opinion, right?



Aim to wound is equivalent to aim to miss.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Steve1501 wrote:
I'm serious.

I said if their is just one man threatening you and you start shooting and he has no gun; why would he keep coming? And if he does keep coming then shoot to kill as a last resort.

Shooting to kill as the 1st resort is just wrong in most cases.

I know the training is to shoot to kill. I'm saying that that is wrong in a civilized part of a civilized country. I am entitled to my opinion, right?

You are entitled to your opinion, sure, but that doesn't mean all opinions are of equal value. There is no such thing as "shooting to wound", legally or practically. Once you have decided you need to use a gun, you have reached the level of deadly force. At that point you shoot at the center of mass until the threat is disabled. A gunfight is a high stress and chaotic thing. FBI data shows that even a center of mass hit often doesn't stop an attacker, and that in a real world gunfight you won't likely get more than one or two center of mass hits on an attacker.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
フィル
Australia
Ashfield
NSW
flag msg tools
designer
Pushing a lesbian old growth union-approved agenda since '94.
mbmbmbmbmb
Cops shouldn't draw a weapon until a shot has been fired. That puts the risk back on the cop instead of on the citizen where it is now. We are happy to put the risk on military, firefighters, etc, but for some reason (the police union?) US cops get a pass to kill people rather than accept the risks cops in other countries take.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank F
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
IF YOU WANT IT
badge
Please investigate a resource based economy.
mbmbmbmbmb
Violence is often the only solution available to people trapped in a sick culture and violence obsessed society. Sadly, it isn't a solution at all.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
So it goes
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
If you can't walk, crawl. If you can't crawl..... well, you know the rest.
badge
Any game is the right game with the right crowd.
mbmbmbmbmb
My wife isn't a patrol officer but she is a police officer here in Milwaukee. I desperately want her to come home after every shift. My children deserve to have their mother become a grandmother to their children. If she were running after a suspect and that suspect turned to face her with a firearm in hand (as how this case has been reported to have happened) I would never question her instantaneous reaction to that threat. Waiting for a suspect to level a weapon and fire first so as to justify return fire seems like a recipe for a sad funeral, not that the one which will take place won't be equally painful for the victims family, friends, and community.

My home town is still raw from the shooting of Donte Hamilton two years ago. A result of that was MPD now wears body cams. Hopefully any video gained from that will show the officer in yesterdays shooting did indeed react to threat instead of making yet another bad decision. If it's the later Milwaukee has the potential to be the next Ferguson.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris
United States
Sandy Springs
Georgia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sbszine wrote:
Cops shouldn't draw a weapon until a shot has been fired. That puts the risk back on the cop instead of on the citizen where it is now. We are happy to put the risk on military, firefighters, etc, but for some reason (the police union?) US cops get a pass to kill people rather than accept the risks cops in other countries take.


This has got to be the stupidest fucking thing I have ever read in RSP. Which says a lot. There should be some sort of award for that.
6 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Cates
United States
Visalia
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Shadrach wrote:
Push communities to the boiling point and sometimes they boil over for all the wrong reasons. The rioting is deplorable, the anger understandable.

By pushing communities to the boiling point, do you mean voting in a democratic mayor endorsed by Obama for four terms that seems more concerned about "biophilia" than bringing jobs to the city?

Salon has a good article about this mayor from 2014. It's good for a laugh. I wonder how his biophilia's working out two years later.
http://www.salon.com/2014/08/20/milwaukee_is_the_new_portlan...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.