Ninja_Named_Bob
Mystic Girl
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2014
- Messages
- 725
- Reputation score
- 381
In what world do you have enough lands to cast Avenger, Doubling Season and Cathar's Crusade, then a Craterhoof without any ramp? I mean holy fuck that's more lands than most decks even have in them!
EDH/Commander, buddy. You obviously have Cathar's Crusade/Doubling Season up the turn prior, and then push with Avenger/Hoof on the follow-up. If we were talking a modern deck, you'd just shit out elves all day or drain your own life for a 10/10 Death's Shadow.
Jokes aside, somebody's pointing a gun at you don't fuck around, it's that simple. And a quick FYI, Colt AR-15s are semi-auto... But there's a full auto rifle that's also referred to as an AR-15 so there's a slight chance that the officer decided to fire 5 individual times.
Pretty sure semi-auto only has a 3-round burst, doesn't it? That was clearly 5 rounds, so he was probably squeezing with moderate discretion.
-snip-
Basically, what Yoshiiki said. I did overlook the whole "easier to deal with variables if they're at a lower stance" thing, so I'll admit missing it.
-reasonable blurb
Also, this. As much as I have to disagree and felt the cop was being too aggressive, etc, it's hard to fully judge a situation from an outsider's perspective. That said, the purpose of an oversight committee is usually to determine if someone in an organization acted in a way that was detrimental to the organization as a whole. They're not always present (if ever) in these kinds of situations, so they have to take testimonies, read statements, and come to a decision based on what evidence is available. They felt there was sufficient cause for him to be tried, so I have to trust that they were acting with objective reasoning and proper judgment. On the other hand, recent events with the FBI shows even the guys meant to keep law enforcement from fucking up aren't infallible, either. It's a mixed bag, and while I disagree with Yoshiiki's justifications on the cops behavior, I have to agree that, not being in that situation and experiencing it myself, I can't properly judge the cop. I can only offer a biased opinion on the matter.
-Snip of awesome reasoning-.
At the end of the day, you're right that all we can do is say "next time" and hope there isn't a "next time." It also comes down to training, which police do lack at times. The cop was properly trained, yes, but clearly still influenced by emotion. He's thinking if he fucks up, him and his entire squad are dead and the suspect is turned loose in a building full of civilians. Do I think the cop was being a bit too aggressive? Yes. Do I think he fired too many rounds? Yes. But, do I disagree that shooting the suspect was the wrong decision? Not really. As you've already pointed out, the cop was being clear with his instructions and gave the suspect multiple opportunities (more than he should have) to cooperate. The suspect fucked up multiple times. The cop is already on edge without unnecessarily risking his life and the lives of his squad. You either shoot, or get shot. All other choices become irrelevant in that situation, and saying "well, but..." after the fact is meaningless. He made a judgment call, and while I am opposed to his handling of the situation, I won't dispute the conclusion he arrived at.
In the end, this police officer will be judged, he killed a man. I do believe that he may need a longer break from work and some help from a specialist.
Always think what you would do in such case: You are called because you got informed that there is an armed guy, he acts weird, your life is on the line. You don't know if he is reaching for a gun and if he is, you may get killed.
You must be registered to see the links
He was tried and found not guilty by a jury. Take from that what you will. Also, that video was definitely an eye-opener. In an odd, well-meaning show of honesty, CNN undergoes a similar experience.
You must be registered to see the links