The ORIGINAL gathering place for a merry band of Three Percenters. (As denounced by Bill Clinton on CNN!)
Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Police Who Used Deadly Force to End High-Speed Car Chase
See also: Justices seem to side with police in deadly chase case
What about the rights of the woman passenger? The "Justices" (according to the article) made comments like: "Innocent people [who] might get injured or killed." "Might" get killed....but didn't. The purpose of government is to protect the rights of the individual. Did they protect the rights of this innocent woman when they shot and killed her? Did they protect the rights of the home owner whose home was destroyed by the car crash caused by killing the driver?We can play "what if" scenarios all day....like "what if" the house the car careened into after the police shot and killed the driver/passenger was loaded with orphans and nuns and the impact killed/maimed a handful of them. Would that be okay? All over a broken light? Seriously?
I am in agreement. The woman passenger should not have to die because of her friend. The cops get away with killing her because of what someone else did?That's just pure bullshit. That being the case, any and all cops associated with another cop obviously breaking the law in a dangerous way can summarily be killed without a second thought.
Post a Comment