Kevin Pollack in The Usual Suspects. Only thing I disliked about his performance. Weren't they doing it in Menace II Society? That's why you turn it sideways: so you can stick it through a car window. After enough times it becomes a force of habit.
Yeah, they may have. Desperado was just the first one I saw. In other news, I like beer and I like peanut butter, but I can't think of any good reason to mix them together. WTF is going on here?
I mean you could still aim down the sight while the gun was turned sideways? Or, like tier one eperators, mount a set on the side of your quad rail.
Out of curiosity I tried it once at the range (read: my back yard) with my .40. From best I can tell, the only advantage it that it makes you feel badass. I tried to get a little accuracy by sighting down the barrel, only luck I had was using the sights on the side and even then accuracy was only kinda shitty vs completely shitty. Plus the recoil felt weird as hell. That being said, on my AR I do have ring sights mounted on 45 degree rails. Benefit to that is that if I'm hog hunting and they're within say, 50 yards, it's a lot quicker to get a sight picture with the rings than finding them in the scope. Plus once they start running, it's easier to follow them in the rings at close range too. Regardless, even on the AR, it still feels a bit unnatural to tilt the weapon sideways. But beyond that very specific purpose, yeah, no benefit in holding the weapon that way.
Walter Scott's murder is a hung jury. That's just plain fucked up. That recent one that was voted in-policy by the D.A.,, the guy was holding a gun and the cops did their job. There are few police shootings that are open-and-shut murder, but Scott's killing was cold blooded murder and we all saw it. That's a broken system right there.
This is the best thread I can think of for this question: Some may have seen that former USC and NY Jets running back was shot and killed in Louisiana yesterday during a traffic dispute. The guy who shot him stayed at the scene, was taken into custody and then released last night. During the press conference today the sherif says they're still investigating but don't have any clear evidence and without saying it said that the guy they released is claiming self defense. I read a little about Louisiana law that attempted car jacking is a defense as a justifiable homicide so although it wasn't that it may fall under something close to a stand your ground law. Is it typical that they would release the suspect that quickly while they're still investigating if they're unsure of what happened or are they basically sure it was self defense if they are releasing him already?
I think it has a lot to do with the fact that he did stay around and immediately surrendered his weapon and cooperated. It's kind of hard to say what happened since I wasn't there, because it does seem unusual to me too. Witnesses said he pulled the guy from his car, shot him, and then shot him again while he was on the ground.
Based off the coroners report they said all the shell casings were in the car of the shooter and at angles that didn't fit in with the original witness story. Basically sounds like one person fed a reporter that story and everyone ran with it.
That was kind of my take on the story, but that coroner's report about gunshot angles seemed to come really, really quickly. It's kind of hard to say what the hell happened.
Shootings are (obviously) complicated and to arm chair quarterback what happened and why is pure speculation at best until the investigation finishes. My pure speculation, in an answer to the original question about why they didn't keep the shooter in custody, is that he wasn't deemed a flight risk or a threat to public safety. If he wasn't one of those two, he's innocent until proven guilty and no sense taking away his constitutional rights by locking him up until the evidence says he should be. Just by him sticking around, goes a long way in showing he wants to follow the law, help with the investigation, stick around. I'd be willing to bet he doesn't go a day without talking to law enforcement and/or his attorney anyway until the case is finished.
It would be nice if people took that approach instead of trying to push their own agenda. We don't know what happened. We have no idea. Yet I just saw a news report where the NAACP is protesting, screeching and yelling and saying "If he'd been a black man..." Fuck all that noise. I am so sick of everything in this country being racist, xenophobic, homophobic, transphobic, fascist, sexist,or what the fuck ever buzz word people come up with. Some people are just fucking assholes and bad shit happens to them without any ulterior motivation. I'm not saying that's the case here, but I am so fatigued by this phobic, ist, ism bullshit it's not even funny.
After the cops thing dies down they'll move onto something else. It comes down to a basic fact of human nature: people don't like to take responsibility for their own actions. Right now, blaming the cops is the socially-acceptable thing to do. Instead of "he was a dumbass for walking toward the cop in a threatening manner with a gun in his hand" it's "the cop should have had better training and known that he wasn't going to shoot him." But before people were blaming the cops, they were blaming guns and gun manufacturers. Tomorrow it might be something else. But people will never blame themselves. Never ever. And that's not reckless armchair quarterbacking. Violence is part of human nature. So is making dumbass fucking decisions. What people don't understand, or refuse to understand, is that sometimes bad shit happens. Sometimes a violent person makes a dumbass decision and the result is something that no rational-thinking person would expect. Shit happens. And if the dumbass who pulled a gun on a cop didn't die from that, he might have died from driving while stoned, or been the victim of a homicide, or ended up in jail on theft or murder charges himself. Some people refuse to follow the basic laws of society that were designed to keep them and everyone else safe, and then when bad shit predictably happens to them everyone else blames everyone else but the idiot. Natural selection is a bitch.
I can understand this feeling, but on the other hand we have some absolute fucking shitheads in power will deny racism 100% of the time. Fucking hell, Dylann Roof walked into a black church, executed a bunch of black folks, said himself that his goal was to start a race war, and you had shithead politicians saying that his attack represented an "attack on Christians". If people don't speak up then nothing will change.
I agree with you 100%. It's like the Pulse nightclub attack where the guy said "I'm doing this for ISIS" and it somehow got twisted into homophobia. The question is how do we stop people, and especially politicians, from twisting horrible crimes to fit their own narrative?
The pulse night club thing was weird because he pledged allegiance to isis but everyone ignored that and either made it about guns or plain old homophobia. Which it sort of was, but you have to look at where that homophobia came from. In his case, a super Muslim gay-hating dad who had a gay son which led to tremendous internal conflict with who he was. I think he used isis to scapegoat the real motive to try to keep people from finding out his gay secret.
No, I don't. I don't care. Just like Dylann Roof. Have you explored where his racist attitudes came from? They're both assholes who couldn't figure out how to get along with the rest of the world and there is no making excuses for either of them.
Brilliant. "In a push to hire minority police officers, the Obama administration is asking the nation’s 18,000 law enforcement agencies to forgive drug use, disregard the criminal records of candidates from “underrepresented communities” and lower standards on written and physical exams. It’s part of the administration’s Advancing Diversity in Law Enforcement initiative following a string of officer-involved shootings involving African Americans. Key to the mission is the racial diversification of local law enforcement agencies so that they “better reflect the diversity of the communities they serve.” http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2...re-drug-use-criminal-records-hire-minorities/ Apparently the key to getting better policing is to lower the standards?
No, it's to start policing more effectively and fairly. Many police forces have quotas to meet, because the fines and charges they levy factor into the city's or the county's operating budget. So cops go out and shake down minority communities for stupid infractions like j-walking, or minor drug possession, or "resisting arrest," or whatever and it places an enormous financial burden on people who are generally already poor. To say nothing about the fact that it alienates the department, so when ACTUAL serious crimes are committed the community sees the cops as the enemy and is extremely reluctant to participate in the investigation. How it's functioning right now is deeply flawed. It targets the wrong people, it disproportionately affects minorities and low income households, and it does nothing to curb serious crime.
How does ethnic quotas help eliminate budget quotas? I'm confused. I get the intention Obama has with something like this, as a thought exercise it's somewhat logical. I still think a simple skin color/ethnicity bar for entry is wildly naive as a solution to the complex problem police face in poor communities. I certainly don't think it does a damn thing to solve the issue of lethal use of force what so ever, which is really a separate issue. A more apt solution might be having cops physically live in these or hired from within the boundaries of the community. It would connect the police on a personal level directly with the community.