Jump to content
TheDeuce

Breonna Taylor Killed In Her Apartment by LMPD Officers

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Jack of all Trades said:

With you 100% here.  To think that only blacks would be shot in the situation as we know it speaks volumes about our society today.  There are laws in this country for a reason.  If you don’t like them pack up and move somewhere else.

Delete. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, GrantNKY said:

I think the entirety of the situation would have played out differently if Walker and Taylor were white. If they were white, I don’t think the situation would have ever happened. The warrant wouldn’t have been served at night, body cams would have been on, they wouldn’t have knocked down the door, and most importantly Breonna Taylor would be alive. To answer the question you asked though, yes the officers would have fired back if Walker was firing at them, but I 100% believe they would have found a way to apprehend Walker and Taylor without lethal force if they were white. 

Completely and totally disagree.  The majority of warrants that I've seen served in NKY involved white people.  I can tell you with absolute certainty that any officer being actively shot at, is going to shoot back and it doesn't matter about age, race, sex or political affiliation.  It's 100% self preservation and the desire to go home at the end of the day.

 

The warrant still gets served at night, waiting to serve it allows for the evidence to potentially disappear.  The rules and regulations may not allow that in the future but until they change, race certainly plays no part.  

 

Your last statement doesn't jive?  Police would fire back regardless of race, but somehow then take them into custody without shooting back?   Am I missing something?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sportsfan41 said:

Completely and totally disagree.  The majority of warrants that I've seen served in NKY involved white people.  I can tell you with absolute certainty that any officer being actively shot at, is going to shoot back and it doesn't matter about age, race, sex or political affiliation.  It's 100% self preservation and the desire to go home at the end of the day.

 

The warrant still gets served at night, waiting to serve it allows for the evidence to potentially disappear.  The rules and regulations may not allow that in the future but until they change, race certainly plays no part.  

 

Your last statement doesn't jive?  Police would fire back regardless of race, but somehow then take them into custody without shooting back?   Am I missing something?

I disagree with everything you’re saying. All I’m saying is just listen to what people are saying. Give the podcast @PurplePride92 has out. Just try and listen to why people feel the way they do. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, GrantNKY said:

I disagree with everything you’re saying. All I’m saying is just listen to what people are saying. Give the podcast @PurplePride92 has out. Just try and listen to why people feel the way they do. 

If it matters to you any I disagree with almost everything you are saying in this thread today and agree with everything @sportsfan41 is saying.  He is spot on, on warrants. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, theguru said:

If it matters to you any I disagree with almost everything you are saying in this thread today and agree with everything @sportsfan41 is saying.  He is spot on, on warrants. 

He is but I have reason to believe, that this will be a learning experience for LMPD. This wasn’t an HVT, or Pablo Escobar, the suspect could have been apprehended in broad daylight.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, John Anthony said:

He is but I have reason to believe, that this will be a learning experience for LMPD. This wasn’t an HVT, or Pablo Escobar, the suspect could have been apprehended in broad daylight.  

There is always room for improvement but serving warrants happens all hours of the day every day and it is extremely dangerous for everyone involved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, theguru said:

There is always room for improvement but serving warrants happens all hours of the day every day and it is extremely dangerous for everyone involved. 

I understand and respect that.  There might not be a “perfect” time to serve one. I just think the risk increases when they kick in a door and serve one at the time of night, that 99% of Americans believe intruders would come.  Unless there is no other option but we don’t know that.

I don’t know the facts because a lot of the facts aren’t being revealed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, John Anthony said:

He is but I have reason to believe, that this will be a learning experience for LMPD. This wasn’t an HVT, or Pablo Escobar, the suspect could have been apprehended in broad daylight.  

I don't know enough about this particular investigation to make any assumptions.  I will say this though, because I've seen it happen before.  If the drug target is only active in the evening or late hours and not during the day, then LEO'S are going to serve that warrant during those hours, because that's when drugs will be present.  It's not uncommon for these locations re-up their supply of drugs during the evening in the middle of business, because they don't like to sit on drugs or keep them around any longer than necessaryat the point of sale.  The leaked Tatum Report about this case actually indicated that was taking place.

 

The problem with waiting until the next day to serve a warrant at the "soft target", where the no knock isn't needed is simply communication.  Nowadays 50 people can know a guy is in jail within minutes of them getting picked up.  Which would make sense as to why LMPD was serving all of the warrants simultaneously.   If the warrant involving Breonna Taylor was simply an arrest warrant, then yes I would 100% agree they could do it during the day or even on a traffic stop etc.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick Gore who has a channel on Youtube and today he spends 45 minutes breaking down the actual warrant.  His channel is Good Luck America.  He is an ex-cop in Texas.  He is sarcastic, hard on cops, and hard on groups that cops have to deal with and hard on the suspected criminals.  But he gives an interesting analysis of the actual warrant.   He is critical of it in a lot of ways.  It ends with the comments that if you shoot at cops - even in your house - they will shoot back.  

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

Whether or not they announced absolutely matters. If they didn’t, they were breaking and entering and every person with a gun would have shot at someone breaking in their apartment in the middle of the night. LMPD knows that, so they have to try to make it look like they announced themselves. 

That is a good point. If they announced, then Walker probably would not have shot at them. I do stand by my comment above that once Walker shot at the officers, they had the right to shoot back. The way they shot back is where they could be guilty of an offense if it was reckless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

That is a good point. If they announced, then Walker probably would not have shot at them. I do stand by my comment above that once Walker shot at the officers, they had the right to shoot back. The way they shot back is where they could be guilty of an offense if it was reckless. 

This.  There are several aspects in this case that you can say might be racist.  A cop firing back after being shot is not one of them.  As @sportsfan41 said earlier, this became about self-preservation at that point.  If the cops entered with guns blazing, it would be a completely different situation.  THEN you would have a legitimate argument that the shooting itself may have been racially motivated.  But, to the best of my knowledge, that's not what happened here. 

I hate that we seem to be in this all or nothing type of mindset where either the police did everything completely wrong...or they did absolutely nothing wrong.  Real life is rarely that cut and dried.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, GrantNKY said:

I disagree with everything you’re saying. All I’m saying is just listen to what people are saying. Give the podcast @PurplePride92 has out. Just try and listen to why people feel the way they do. 

They don’t want to know man. It doesn’t affect them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

That is a good point. If they announced, then Walker probably would not have shot at them. I do stand by my comment above that once Walker shot at the officers, they had the right to shoot back. The way they shot back is where they could be guilty of an offense if it was reckless. 

Hence the three charges against the one officer that was outside and shooting blindly. 

Based on the lack of other charges it appears that none of his rounds struck Ms. Taylor.  So it would appear all rounds came from the officers breaching. 

Was talking with a former US Marshal (and state judge) Friday night.  He indicated that after they lost some Marshals in shootouts and after analyzing that situation and other shootings involving drive-bys, etc. that the training was changed for LEOs.  He indicated that old training was to line up the sights - like lining up rifles - and fire very precisely.  But was slow and ineffective when the other side relied on lots of shots without the precise aiming.  So training changed he said in the late 70s or around then.  He indicated LEOs are trained to respond without using the sites and engage with multiple rounds. 

From videos I have seen, including one with a stop in Louisville in May where an officer is hit at point blank range in the shoulder, LEOs fire at least 4 rounds when forced to engage. They do not fire 1 or 2 if they have to fire. 

Those in LEO business - is this correct? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

They don’t want to know man. It doesn’t affect them.

Damn truth right there Deuce. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bluegrasscard said:

Hence the three charges against the one officer that was outside and shooting blindly. 

Based on the lack of other charges it appears that none of his rounds struck Ms. Taylor.  So it would appear all rounds came from the officers breaching. 

Was talking with a former US Marshal (and state judge) Friday night.  He indicated that after they lost some Marshals in shootouts and after analyzing that situation and other shootings involving drive-bys, etc. that the training was changed for LEOs.  He indicated that old training was to line up the sights - like lining up rifles - and fire very precisely.  But was slow and ineffective when the other side relied on lots of shots without the precise aiming.  So training changed he said in the late 70s or around then.  He indicated LEOs are trained to respond without using the sites and engage with multiple rounds. 

From videos I have seen, including one with a stop in Louisville in May where an officer is hit at point blank range in the shoulder, LEOs fire at least 4 rounds when forced to engage. They do not fire 1 or 2 if they have to fire. 

Those in LEO business - is this correct? 

Not a law enforcement officer, but this kind of policy, if true, is a major issue. Blindly fire as many rounds as possible with no regard to accuracy is moronic. Where are the getting their training manuals from? A 13 year old who plays Call of Duty all day? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.