Red Mosquito

Bi_3 wrote:

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:So you’re saying that andy took a video snippet which misrepresented the circumstances of the shooting by not including key moments, and promoted that? Unheard of. He wouldn’t.

No one here was saying that until you did. The two tweets show different frames from two distinct moments in the same widely circulating video and describe the frames individually without claim to describing the whole event.

In watching the video it appears he tossed the gun to surrender. He should not have been shot. But that doesn't mean he didnt have a gun a second or two before the shot was fired. Not sure why this is so confusing to for you.

I was saying that. At what point is he no longer armed?

In the vimeo the Ngo linked he clearly has the gun at 2:38:39 timestamp and does not at 2:38:40 (when he is shot).

Armed or unarmed?

Wait... are you trying to use the fraction of a second between the time he tosses the gun and he is shot to prove Ngo was misrepresenting what happened?

He states armed in his tweet, just curious if we all agree.

Christ dude, get some perspective. Here’s the cnn article if you want someone else to describe a sub second nuance: https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/15/us/adam- ... index.html

Here’s some perspective. Which one is more threatening?

while i agree the kyle compares are damning my hesitancy in comparing different cases is it is different cops. so the situations are completely different with different factors affecting the outcome. the only way you are going to have a level playing field of everyone being treated equally in all situations is to have Omni Consumer Products start mass producing Robocop so they all have the same programming and logic

Ah yes, let’s neuter our cops so they can conduct stops like this one without being able to protect themselves. Good people on both sides, right?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/newyork.cb ... lopez/amp/

Let's have AI fix this is a really bold take

Bammer wrote:Ah yes, let’s neuter our cops so they can conduct stops like this one without being able to protect themselves. Good people on both sides, right?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/newyork.cb ... lopez/amp/

Hmm...

They were clearly already under surveillance prior to being stopped.
They were pulled over.
As far as we know nobody was shot (on either side).
Arrests were made.

What is your point about this story and it's relevance to anything? Honestly asking, Bammer. Is the point that MS 13 is scary?

His point is traffic stops are dangerous. Pretty simple.

<snip>

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote: Christ dude, get some perspective. Here’s the cnn article if you want someone else to describe a sub second nuance: https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/15/us/adam- ... index.html

Here’s some perspective. Which one is more threatening?

I'm not gonna play "let's get BI to defend Rittenhouse" with you.

I'm not gonna play "838ms is enough time to transition from armed to unarmed thus making some tweet incorrect and granting many internet points to me" with you either.



Now back on topic... acknowledging I have no idea what the rules are in this area and that cops should not have to accept getting shot before they shoot an armed suspect, morally it seems to me there must be an opportunity for surrender and thus as I have stated in previous posts this kid appeared to be surrendering and should not have been shot. If the law says cops do not have to give a suspect who was armed and fleeing that chance, then it's a bad law and should be changed, but makes the cops actions lawful in this case.

Bi_3 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:No wait I take that back. What Ngo tweeted wasn't nearly as bad as that. They aren't the same. Your friendly national propaganda outlet is far worse.

Wait... that was real and not a random twitter accusation? They actually intentionally dropped the frames showing the gun or were they just lost in compression/re-encode?

CBS cropped out the side of the video (where he had the gun), paused on him having his hands up (making it appear that his hands were up far longer than they really were), and didn't show any of the aftermath. They might as well have added in audio of the cop screaming racial slurs for good measure.

It's compression due to the Twitter aspect ratio. If you click through to the link not only does it show the whole frame but it pauses to highlight the gun. Can't possibly think of a reason why they paused after the shots and didn't put a child bleeding out on autoplay on the timeline.

Mickey wrote:It's compression due to the Twitter aspect ratio. If you click through to the link not only does it show the whole frame but it pauses to highlight the gun. Can't possibly think of a reason why they paused after the shots and didn't put a child bleeding out on autoplay on the timeline.

Lol leave it to Mickey to defend the establishment, and so badly.

verb_to_trust wrote:His point is traffic stops are dangerous. Pretty simple.

This seems like a non-roitine traffic stop. Which is why these gangs members were already under surveillance. So it's likely not a typical squad car running the plates and making the stop, right? So it's sort of a mango in a conversation about apples.

I'm sure the CBS social media dept. is blissfully unaware of what the video showed on Twitter to 8.1 million followers. "Oops. Oh well I'll just leave it up." And blurring out the blood? Who ever heard of such a thing?

elliseamos wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:His point is traffic stops are dangerous. Pretty simple.

This seems like a non-roitine traffic stop. Which is why these gangs members were already under surveillance. So it's likely not a typical squad car running the plates and making the stop, right? So it's sort of a mango in a conversation about apples.

He could have linked a video of an officer getting shot. Would that have passed inspection?

Here's a CBS tweet that isn't cropped. Funny that.

verb_to_trust wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:His point is traffic stops are dangerous. Pretty simple.

This seems like a non-roitine traffic stop. Which is why these gangs members were already under surveillance. So it's likely not a typical squad car running the plates and making the stop, right? So it's sort of a mango in a conversation about apples.

He could have linked a video of an officer getting shot. Would that have passed inspection?

It just seems like an odd, irrelevant post. I'm worried for Bammer. Why don't you care about other people, Burt?!

elliseamos wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:His point is traffic stops are dangerous. Pretty simple.

This seems like a non-roitine traffic stop. Which is why these gangs members were already under surveillance. So it's likely not a typical squad car running the plates and making the stop, right? So it's sort of a mango in a conversation about apples.

He could have linked a video of an officer getting shot. Would that have passed inspection?

It just seems like an odd, irrelevant post. I'm worried for Bammer. Why don't you care about other people, Burt?!

Irrelevant?

Bammer wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:His point is traffic stops are dangerous. Pretty simple.

This seems like a non-roitine traffic stop. Which is why these gangs members were already under surveillance. So it's likely not a typical squad car running the plates and making the stop, right? So it's sort of a mango in a conversation about apples.

He could have linked a video of an officer getting shot. Would that have passed inspection?

It just seems like an odd, irrelevant post. I'm worried for Bammer. Why don't you care about other people, Burt?!

Irrelevant?

oh no. Delirious laughter. We've lost him, team.

elliseamos wrote:

Bammer wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:His point is traffic stops are dangerous. Pretty simple.

This seems like a non-roitine traffic stop. Which is why these gangs members were already under surveillance. So it's likely not a typical squad car running the plates and making the stop, right? So it's sort of a mango in a conversation about apples.

He could have linked a video of an officer getting shot. Would that have passed inspection?

It just seems like an odd, irrelevant post. I'm worried for Bammer. Why don't you care about other people, Burt?!

Irrelevant?

oh no. Delirious laughter. We've lost him, team.

It was more of a lighthearted chuckle, but still ...

He's not Burt!

BurtReynolds wrote:He's not Burt!

Third person?