Printable View
How brutal can you get ?Quote:
Police killed a 27-year-old man as he kicked, punched and stomped a toddler to death despite other people's attempts to stop him on a dark, country road, authorities said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080616/...us/baby_killed
I know it's a serious post... but when I read that, I was reminded of this:
http://gerbick.com/images/bp.gif
And don't ask "how brutal" anybody can get. More gruesome things happen... but this is still sick.
I also know this is a serious post, but I had to share this screen shot... too perfect.
http://www.deathbypapercut.com/baby.bmp
wow.
that answer your question babs?
Dude that ad really doesn't belong there.
is that photoshop work? Cause if not this entire page is made of real life crap. String in the search field?Quote:
Originally Posted by ViRGo_RK
Straight screen shot man, so bizarre.
not really
A story about death, including a baby
life insurance ad with a baby.
If the story had been about sagging home prices it would have been a homes ad.
Full of demons
Maybe, but it wasn't the kid.
Ugh.Quote:
Responding to 911 calls, a Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department helicopter landed in a dairy pasture near the scene. A Modesto police officer, Jerry Ramar, fatally shot Aguilar after he failed to heed the officer's warning to stop beating the child, authorities said. Aguilar flashed his middle finger at Ramar before Ramar shot him in the forehead, police said.
Do cops really have to shoot to kill? Right in the forehead? Couldn't shoot him in the leg or something.
Are you serious? Did you read this:Quote:
Originally Posted by WannaBe_80z
"…removed a 2-year-old boy from his car seat and proceeded to stomp, kick and punch the boy to death, authorities said. The boy was unrecognizable when he was pronounced dead at Emanuel Medical Center…"
Sorry if my opinions as a parent is clouding my judgement on this, but I'm thinking the use of force by a police officer is not the issue here.
d.
oh no I totally agree this guy got what he deserved. I don't want him rotting and wasting tax dollars(even though he would get even more brutalized IN prison then being dead)
I meant it as a open question. At what point do cops take out their weapons and aim for the head? Aren't they supposed to disable the person- shoot in the arm, leg, etc?
Ah. Got it. I'm not normally a "let the police shoot people" kind of guy, but imagining the scenario that this officer came upon, I can imagine using deadly force was legit.Quote:
Originally Posted by WannaBe_80z
d.
Police have very strict "deadly force" policies.Quote:
Originally Posted by WannaBe_80z
There is no "shoot to wound" policy in any US police department to the best of my knowledge.
Defence of Life is the #1 policy reason for the use of deadly force.
Once an officer has to make the decision to use deadly force in a situation there can be no chance for mistakes by trying to "shoot to wound" therefore they must shoot to kill in the quickest way possible.
Now the real question is did the situation warrant the use of deadly force?
It doesn't say that the suspect had a weapon of any kind.
What prevented the officer from taking down the suspect by non-deadly means? (tackle, taser, baton, etc.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue
the officer order them to stop, he refused and continued to beat a human being to death in a dark alleyway. Deadly force is acceptable.
Some people deserve a fate worse than death. Society seems to believe that execution is the ultimate punishment.
Surely a better situation is one where someone who has done such an awful thing would find themselves in a situation where they would prefer death over their current circumstances but unable to obtain this state. This would be closer to justice than sparing them any discomfort by instant death.
In this situation he probably wasn't concsious of the fact he had been shot in the head before he died.