An undercover police officer arranged to buy 2 magic mushroom chocolate bars over Instagram then opened fire within seconds, killing the driver and injuring the passenger for selling $100 worth of antidepressants. Perfectly justified.

  • Hegar@kbin.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Op means to incite emotional response from readers by using the “because of” version.

    No I don’t.

    I mean to invite emotional response using the meaning I just explained above - cops planned to arrest someone over nothing, and their incompetence lead to killing him over nothing.

    If it was just because they had 2 shroom bars, that would be extrajudicial execution. That’s Duterte level policing and would be a national story.

    The pointlessness of this arrest should be emotional - it’s an obvious injustice. The police set up a potentially deadly situation with no potential value to society. The standard mamallian response to being cornered was all it took to escalate this to fatal. Over nothing.

    bullshit to not show all sides of the story.
    That’s some Fox News shit.

    Nope, one side is objectively lying about the facts. Repeating the lies of the powerful is some fox news shit. I’m gonna to stick to presenting the facts - cops planned to arrest someone over nothing, and their incompetence lead to killing him over nothing.

    • skeptomatic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m with you, that it was mishandled and the cop who fired is incompetent, I’m with you that loss of life is terrible, I’m with you that setting up a sort of sting to buy 2 zoomer-bars is a waste of taxpayer money. It’s all an injustice. As I said before the victim might not even have known the guy was a cop…
      But they didn’t kill him over “nothing” they killed him over the flee attempt.
      The guy must have been a known drug dealer for them to bother setting up. And reminder, he had a loaded semi-auto rifle in the vehicle. Though it doesn’t say anything about the legality of that weapon.

      Anyway, here’s a scenario:
      Man walks into convenience store.
      Man shoplifts a chocolate bar.
      Cop notices.
      Cop says “hey stop”.
      Man pulls hidden GRENADE from his pocket, pulls the pin, and attempts to throw at vicinity of cop.
      Police shoot and kill man.

      The way you say your headline should read:
      DOJ says police officer justified in killing man for shoplifting chocolate bar.

      I mean…c’mon.

      • Revan343@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        In your scenario, the police did not actively seek out the situation and then fuck it up.

        In this scenario, they did

      • Hegar@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        they didn’t kill him over “nothing” they killed him over the flee attempt.

        The decision was: do I let this kid get away with selling 2 shroom bars or do I deploy potentially lethal force?

        If someone’s unnecessarily killed during say an armed robbery, they weren’t killed over nothing, even if they could’ve been arrested.

        Police are empowered to use violence with the understanding that it will benefit society. And most will agree that preventing armed robbery has value.

        This officer deployed violence to prevent a kid from getting away with selling 2 shroom bars. Without any personal threat. That has no value to society, nothing. And a kid was killed over it.

        I don’t understand why the particular events that happened before that seem so important to you?