←back to thread

628 points nodea2345 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
program_whiz ◴[] No.21125050[source]
Sure, the kid was swinging at the officer, and I suppose that warrants the officer acting in self-defense. But another question is, what are the protesters supposed to do? The government has all the power, and can simply snuff out any resistence. If you just stand in the streets, they really don't care, they are going to take your freedom. Imagine if the US suddenly had a dictator that just decided they were going to take all property rights and freedoms like that -- I think taking to the streets, and even resorting to violence might be necessary (otherwise the powers-that-be have no reason to listen to a bunch of people standing in a street hundreds of miles away).
replies(21): >>21125109 #>>21125130 #>>21125159 #>>21125323 #>>21125359 #>>21125396 #>>21125728 #>>21125946 #>>21126113 #>>21126194 #>>21126243 #>>21126597 #>>21128682 #>>21129125 #>>21129256 #>>21129285 #>>21129663 #>>21130428 #>>21131160 #>>21131429 #>>21140974 #
goblin89 ◴[] No.21128682[source]
> warrants the officer acting in self-defense

I question the appropriateness of using a firearm with conventional lethal ammunition.

A rubber bullet in lower body would have had enough stopping power. What happened looks like a blatant violation of any reasonable protocol law enforcement would be supposed to behave in accordance with under the circumstances.

replies(1): >>21128764 #
mieseratte ◴[] No.21128764[source]
> A rubber bullet in lower body would have had enough stopping power.

No, it wouldn't. I've sustained worse injuries than a rubber bullet and remained fighting.

A bat to the head is a lethal assault. Using a firearm against such an assailant is completely justified.

This has nothing to do with pro / anti CCP feelings. As far as I'm concerned the CCP should be eliminated.

Your assertion is devoid of any reality.

replies(2): >>21129208 #>>21129287 #
1. goblin89 ◴[] No.21129208[source]
> remained fighting

Without interruption? Then I stand corrected.

I imagine the point would be to confound, give the time to extract the officer from immediate danger, not to immobilize the attacker entirely with a rubber bullet.

(And you’re right, I should not have phrased that as an assertion not being an expert in the field.)