“I went to hug him because he was upset, and next thing I know they just yelled ‘Jason!’ and they ‘pow, pow, pow, pow, pow,'” Odell said. “I about got shot. I felt the compressions of the bullets. It was horrible.”
Wow. A part of me wants to know what kvjxq was saying lol.
nothing particularly unorthodox if you’ve seen conservative salivating about police shootings before. mostly, it was just trying to justify why the police were correct to roll up and immediately shoot this guy, even though he hasn’t been tried or convicted on the crime they were arresting him for.
So I missed out on nothing sounds like
to answer a query downthread, separate from the rest of this:
And given that he was in his sister’s arms (it’s unclear if it was his sister or aunt to my reading, given that “the deceased” now refers to two of them) and not, yknow, holding the funeral goers hostage, there were still options.
it appears the person he was in the arms of was definitively his aunt. CBS has the following details:
WBOY-TV reported that Evelyn O’Dell identified him as Jason Owens, the son of Junior Arnie Owens, whose funeral was held Wednesday. O’Dell is Junior Owens’ sister. […] “I’m distraught. I’m just totally upset,” O’Dell said. “I was getting ready to go lay my brother down in the ground and they shot his son. It’s a mess.”
deleted by creator
Except this doesn’t happen in the third world
the utility of analogizing american problems to third world ones is questionable and arguably kind of weird in a lot of cases, but “extrajudicially killing alleged criminals” and worse is a definitely a problem many developing counties have with their police forces. the phillippines under duterte and how they dealt with alleged drug crimes and criminals immediately come to mind here.
Removed by mod
and these justify being shot while hugging your aunt at a funeral?
no see obviously, if you do any crime it’s automatically valid to then extrajudicially murder you even if you’re just existing, lol. we at some point started living in judge dredd rules, i guess
Removed by mod
This headline makes it sound like the police just rolled up and shot some random dude for no reason, which is disingenuous
except they literally did do that, lol. i’m not sure why we’re trying to justify this here, exactly:
“He [Jason] just took his dad out and put him in the car [hearse], carried the casket out, and he came over and I was hugging him, and next thing I know, somebody yelled ‘Jason!’ and then, you know, ‘boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom,'” Odell said. “He didn’t have a chance to do nothing.”
Odell said she was hugging Jason when he was shot.
“I went to hug him because he was upset, and next thing I know they just yelled ‘Jason!’ and they ‘pow, pow, pow, pow, pow,'” Odell said. “I about got shot. I felt the compressions of the bullets. It was horrible.”
Removed by mod
I don’t care if he had an AK strapped to his back, this murder is unjustifiable.
We all have the context and still feel this was wrong. I assure you, it isn’t a kneejerk reaction.
Removed by mod
No, it would not be enough, and I don’t only say this because the police shouldn’t exist in the first place. What’s more important is that they have a right to a fair trial just like anyone else. If there are literally any options to stop him from doing harm without killing him, they first need to be taken. And given that he was in his sister’s arms (it’s unclear if it was his sister or aunt to my reading, given that “the deceased” now refers to two of them) and not, yknow, holding the funeral goers hostage, there were still options.
The context of when and how he was shot are both incredibly important. Do you think it’s okay for police to shoot a non-violent, unarmed suspect?
They absolutely did not, and it’s disingenuous to pretend that they did. From the article:
neither “having a warrant for [his] arrest” nor “previously committing a crime” are a justification for shooting someone (especially not before they’ve actually been tried for the alleged crime they’re being arrested on) and i know for a fact you know that because committing a crime is not punished in any sane country by summary execution before trial. for someone throwing around the word “disingenuous”, you are very obviously ignoring the inconvenient circumstances of what you’re trying to defend in trying to run defense here for cops capitally punishing someone for no reason.
Removed by mod
i just want to point out: this is a really funny thing to say to someone who is literally an admin on the instance you’re on right now. i don’t mean to condescend here, genuinely, but maybe this instance is not for you if you find yourself doing this.
- This context is in the article
- This context does not excuse the action
- Nothing about the title above is not true
- Please answer the question
Removed by mod
okay guess you don’t want to answer the question lol
Removed by mod
Christ
Persons of a religious persuasion, particularly Christians, may be offended by your use of this word.
this place is a circle jerk
Are you accusing us here? Personally, I don’t believe this place is the right fit for you. Would you mind leaving Beehaw voluntarily?
Your justification is framed through the eyes of ‘I don’t know what happened’ and we need an ‘investigation’, the question I was asking was establishing a specific way in which a suspect was shot and asking for your opinion on it. I’m curious to your thoughts on this specific use case, because I’m curious under what circumstances you think it’s okay to shoot someone suspected of a crime.
Removed by mod
