RBSC

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is it possible that the woman shot at the Capitol

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is it possible that the woman shot at the Capitol

    could be...black! And even Jamaican?

    The daughter's hair, the residence in Brooklyn...


    BLACK LIVES MATTER

  • #2
    I heard that she was black.
    "‎It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men" - Frederick Douglass

    Comment


    • #3
      Why else would she be shot? If it were a WF they wld have her in a straight jacket, send her to counseling, take care of the kid....and EXPLAIN why she did what she did...at the end of her trial, physical and mental abuse since she was 12....then loyal Americans would get her a new car, new house, new life....

      Comment


      • #4
        I can't blame them. In these 911 days...


        BLACK LIVES MATTER

        Comment


        • #5
          Black woman from Stamford suffering from post-partum depression, and this is another case of violence linked to mental illness. One Doctor on CBS said American society has long accepted 10% of crimes linked to mental illness.

          Shooting appears to be justified, and when you run over a cop & send him to the hospital with your car, expected to be shot!

          The boyfriend said the woman was acting delusional, claiming the president had placed Stamford under lockdown and that her house was under electronic surveillance, the source said.
          He told police that she was suffering from post-partum depression, was having trouble sleeping and was on medication.
          Winning means you're willing to go longer, work harder, and give more than anyone else - Vince Lombardi

          Comment


          • #6
            Untreated mental illness an imminent danger?


            http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_16...ass-shootings/
            Winning means you're willing to go longer, work harder, and give more than anyone else - Vince Lombardi

            Comment


            • #7
              Many other ways to stop a car besides KILLING the driver.

              Comment


              • #8
                Yes, but this is in the US capital with many rich targets for terrorism. Police could not have known what she was up to or what she had in the car. The car itself was a weapon capable of mass murder.

                Trying to run a car through a White House security checkpoint? That alone is enough to justify the use of deadly force.
                "‎It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men" - Frederick Douglass

                Comment


                • #9
                  The rules of engagement are very different near the US Capitol & White House. Cops don't know if the person is a terrorist with a car bomb.
                  Winning means you're willing to go longer, work harder, and give more than anyone else - Vince Lombardi

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The family is very upset, and somewhat in denial. While admitting she suffered from post partum depression and the subsequent psychosis, they believe deadly force was unnecessary.


                    BLACK LIVES MATTER

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      If I was a member of the family I would be very upset too.

                      A lot of people around us have mental health & drug abuse problems than we realize. An African brethren had to call the cops on his crack head brother who stole his TV, and took off with his car. A work colleague had to bring the court system to get his brother committed to a drug rehab facility, and this took a long time, even after repeated threats by his brother on his family.
                      Winning means you're willing to go longer, work harder, and give more than anyone else - Vince Lombardi

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Use of force in Capitol Hill shooting debated

                        Police typically are allowed to use deadly force in cases of imminent danger to themselves or others. In the District, police are not allowed to fire warning shots or to shoot into a crowd or solely to protect property.
                        Officers in the District also are prohibited from shooting β€œat or from a moving vehicle unless deadly force is being used against the officer or another person.” The guidelines, implemented after 1998, further state that β€œa moving vehicle is not considered deadly force. Members shall, as a rule, avoid tactics that could place them in a position where a vehicle could be used against them.”
                        http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...f_story_1.html
                        Winning means you're willing to go longer, work harder, and give more than anyone else - Vince Lombardi

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Thanks.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I think it was reckless of the police,it was not the secret sevice,the cop that was injured placed himself in danger(he would not have jumped in front of a gun,that mitigates the vehicle deemed a deadly weapon) ,and her toddler was in the car.
                            In hindsight,we know there were options if explored that would have ended the ordeal without death.Ergo,it should've been considered.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Agreed Rock,they knew not to shoot the child ? If the vehicle is viewed as a threat .Then everything in it is ?

                              If as they say she left the car darting, then that threat has decreased where less drastic action could have been used, i.e Tasers !
                              THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!

                              "Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.


                              "It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X