Police use Taser on 95 year old man in retirement home, then use bean bag round to his gut, which killed him.

Just like you ..... Originally Posted by WTF

Clearly not the case. But if it makes you feel better about yourself, please carry on.

Yes. You DO have a clue. Several in fact. Originally Posted by ExNYer

Actually, I don't. Because, unlike you, I would add to each item on your list ......


"According to the article" and "according to my opinion" ....

So ... you don't either have a clue as to what actually happened ....

And you are basing your conclusions and opinions on an article posted on a hooker board!

If you didn't learn anything out of the Zimmerman/Martin fiasco .. it ought to be ....

.. disregard and/or severely discount what the media reports!!!!

Clearly not the case. But if it makes you feel better about yourself, please carry on. Originally Posted by LexusLover

We are talking about grades 1-12. Are you lying and saying you did not go to public schools?

I went to public schools.

I have not had any kids yet still pay school taxes so I would say that I have paid back what was spent towards me in my youth plus some.
Can you make that same claim.
Can you show me any figures where old folks on Medicare are not getting back more than they put into the system? Because clearly that can not continue...but you want it to continue for your benefit, fuck the younger generation.

You clearly do not understand the math or are to selfish to care...

That is clearly the case.

We can debate opinion but not math and you are losing this math argument, just like you have every time you bring it up.

Now run along and justify killing a 95 year old man.

While I think the 95 years old makes that a math problem subject to right and wrong, clearly you do not. I would not have those officers on my force, you would, we have a difference of opinion there.

Can you show me any figures where old folks on Medicare are not getting back more than they put into the system? . Originally Posted by WTF

That's not what you claimed.

As is typical of you, when you lose on your claim, you change the claim.

Your parents did not pay sufficient taxes to pay for your public education. Period.

As is typical of you, when you lose on your claim, you change the claim.[/B] Originally Posted by LexusLover

Lexi Liar must be feeling guilty because years ago he lost his claim (as it relates to the ill fated and ill advised spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq) and then desperately tried to "change the claim" later?

How do "WE THE PEOPLE" spell hypocrite?

Lexi Liar, of course!

Yes. You DO have a clue. Several in fact.

For starters, he was 96. NO ONE that age has fast reflexes or any significant strength. Post a link to someone if you can find one.

As befits someone his age, he was mostly bedridden and, when he did get out of bed, he used a cane or a walker to hobble round.

Clearly, this was a feeble individual who needed to be in a hospice because he could not take card of himself.

And he appeared to have been losing his mind from dementia. There are tens of thousands like him in this country and, by and large, when they get cranky and act up, nurses and hospital orderlies are easily able to restrain them.

I have no idea what they were thinking when they decided to call the cops. Maybe they were shorthanded. But they wound up calling some "by the book" asshole with no sense of compassion who did not care to have his "aw-thaw-i-tay" challenged, even by a decrepit, senile old man.

To top it off, they made up some bullshit story about the old guy having a kitchen knife to cover their tracks. Originally Posted by ExNYer

Exactly, good post btw. Yea, the whole knife thing seems to be common now among law enforcment who "fuck up". Its was knife, no wait, it was a chair, or err, no it was really a broomstick..

I know of a liar, I used too C ... I just let that person lie and lie and lie and not say anything

Someone lower the exam or gave a very big curve... remember when I was in college and how one year their had too be a big curve in electromagnitic class

Unfortunately for an informative discourse, folks, as yourself, inject "opinions" into the scenario in order to confirm the point desired to be made ...

as for this particularly individual I have no clue as to how "easy" it might be to grab the cane ... or "restraint him to a bed" .... and I assume neither were you, so you ask.

There is a rather worn out saying: "Easier said than done." It applies here.

But that's the reason why you are here posting ... to demonstrate your prowess. Right?

Which reminds me of another worn out phrase ... something about walking in someone else's moccasins.

Generally speaking there is no standard response to every ... "man in a rest home wielding a cane" .... there are guidelines in most state's penal codes (or related codes) regarding force continuums for response to threats, which includes LE officers, that gives them some guidance in how to respond generally, along with departmental policies that are often written to protect the agency and not the officer.

It's always easy to critique after the fact. In fact, had this guy not died we probably wouldn't have this thread. Are there instances in which LE over responds? Of course. Could they have been avoided? Yes. Sometimes with a good result ... sometimes not. If they don't respond effectively and gain control over the situation, and a bystander gets hurt, then they get blamed for not taking sufficient efforts to immediately gain control of the person causing the problem .. and they get trashed on hooker boards for being incompetent ... and not responding "effectively."

If you want and expect people to be "perfect" according to your standards...

........... then take a long hard look in the mirror ... EVERY DAY! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Lexus,

Were you in law enforcement at some point? I get that feeling by skimming a lot of your posts. Either that or your a retired lawyer maybe?

You type like you have first hand knowledge on how police conduct themselves, that is why I ask.

But you don't have to answer my question.. I know we are all suppose to be anonymous here.

Lexus,

Were you in law enforcement at some point? I get that feeling by skimming a lot of your posts. Either that or your a retired lawyer maybe?

You type like you have first hand knowledge on how police conduct themselves, that is why I ask.

But you don't have to answer my question.. I know we are all suppose to be anonymous here. Originally Posted by Stan.Dupp

None of the above. But I do suggest that those who critique have some indepth knowledge of the subject matter in which they critique. It has been my observation that very few, if any, movie critics have actually made a movie or even participated in the making of one.

I've had a life long friend who learned fluent Russian at an early age and at the same time learned computer software writing long before the vast majority of people had even seen a computer (or a picture of one). It became "handy" in later life when he was recruited and employed to keep up with the Soviets during the cold war. He was not a Russian, although he did have some similarities to the stereotypical pictures of one in those days. He could pass for one easily.

I once heard it stated that the only people who die of mushroom poisoning are "mushroom experts."

For instance, I would never challenge BT's expertise in jumping out of perfectly good aircraft. Just his sanity.

For instance, I would never challenge BT's expertise in jumping out of perfectly good aircraft. Just his sanity. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Airborne!

Actually, I don't. Because, unlike you, I would add to each item on your list ......

"According to the article" and "according to my opinion" ....

So ... you don't either have a clue as to what actually happened ....

And you are basing your conclusions and opinions on an article posted on a hooker board!

If you didn't learn anything out of the Zimmerman/Martin fiasco .. it ought to be ....

.. disregard and/or severely discount what the media reports!!!! Originally Posted by LexusLover

OK, I'll bite.

For starters, the article is from the Chicago Tribune, a reputable newspaper. The fact that it was re-posted to a hooker board is irrelevant.

And your standard about none of us knowing because we weren't there is ludicrous. In that case, no one can ever have an opinion.

But let's get to the meat of what you are insinuating - that the article might be false.

Are you saying he was not 96?

Are you saying he was not confined to a nursing home because he was feeble?

Are you saying he didn't need a walker or a cane?

Are you saying that he was strong and had fast reflexes - unlike every other 96 year old on earth?

The basic FACTS that indicate the cops are full of shit are not in dispute.

We have to suspend our disbelief in order to accept the police story that he was a threat. Suspension of disbelief might be useful for watching Disney movies and horror films, but not for real life.

And this case is NOTHING like Zimmerman. Trayvon Martin was at least CAPABLE of doing everything Zimmerman said he did. And I was one of the ones who said there was not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman.

This 96 year old was NOT capable of doing what the police said he did. They are lying to cover their own asses.

That's not what you claimed.

As is typical of you, when you lose on your claim, you change the claim.

Your parents did not pay sufficient taxes to pay for your public education. Period. Originally Posted by LexusLover

If yours paid a 100 dollars they over paid for your education!




I have not changed a thing btw. I did add something else to the mix but it seems it was to complicated for you to follow.

OK, I'll bite.

For starters, the article is from the Chicago Tribune, a reputable newspaper. The fact that it was re-posted to a hooker board is irrelevant. Bingo but LL seems not to be able to grasp this small fact.

And your standard about none of us knowing because we weren't there is ludicrous. In that case, no one can ever have an opinion. Only LL can comment about how dangerous 96 year old men are. Evidently to LL a 96 year old men need a good zapping from time to time. Who are we to question why the police would zap a 96 year old man. Has anybody mentioned to LL that the man was 96 years old!?

But let's get to the meat of what you are insinuating - that the article might be false.
He is insinuating that only he can comment on this article because we were not there.

Are you saying he was not 96?
But in damn good shape for a 96 year old, good enough for a good police beat down! Haven't you heard LL is scared of 96 year old men.

Are you saying he was not confined to a nursing home because he was feeble?
Define confined...

Are you saying he didn't need a walker or a cane?
Those are lethal weapons according to LL.

Are you saying that he was strong and had fast reflexes - unlike every other 96 year old on earth? He was the Bruce Lee of 96 year old men.

The basic FACTS that indicate the cops are full of shit are not in dispute.
You weren't there...

We have to suspend our disbelief in order to accept the police story that he was a threat. Suspension of disbelief might be useful for watching Disney movies and horror films, but not for real life.
You've never seem ''Beauty and the 96 year old man''.

And this case is NOTHING like Zimmerman. Trayvon Martin was at least CAPABLE of doing everything Zimmerman said he did. And I was one of the ones who said there was not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman.

These officers were even dumber than Zimmerman...and that is damn near impossible.

This 96 year old was NOT capable of doing what the police said he did. They are lying to cover their own asses. Originally Posted by ExNYer

Police lie..never in LL world.

THE POLICE IN CHICAGO AND IL ARE WORSE THAN THE PEOPLE THEY ARE BUSTING
JON BURGE IS IN PRISON BECAUSE HIS DEC TORTUED PEOPLE PLAIN AND SIMPLE
THE STATE OF IL PARDONED OR COMMTIED TO LIFE OF EVERY ONE ON DEATH ROW
BECAUSE OF THE DEC ON THE MIDNIGHT SHIFT AT AERA 2 AND YES I NOW SOME OF THE
NAMES

Your caps lock is on.