Whaletail has a very valid point. in MY town, the people in the high-crime neighborhoods are unwilling to have anything to do with the 'taking back' of thier homes. They won't report crimes, won't assist in the prosecution of the perpetrators, and generally contribute to the loss of their own personal safety.

I don't believe it...we actually agree on something...

I have to agree with Mr. Scoe. silverwhaletail, did you forget about thing you swore to uphold and defend? I seriously hope you are not in a position to set policy if that is how you feel about your line of work. Usually a person's feelings about their line of work directly effect their performance and demeanor on the job.

Back on-topic... I certainly hope as the family pursues a case they can get the murderer behind bars. Unfortunately, it seems that when an event like this unfolds, the wagons get circled. The worst I've seen (or read of) yet is the person responsible for the bad shoot gets fired and maybe community service. I guess the line of duty comes with perks all around...

Valid point my a$$. Its all economics... if you don't own the property where you live its not the same. Renting is not owning. Why would you want to "take back" something that you don't own? Lets get into the real discussion about gentrification and the other B.S. thats going on here...

Who said rent vs. own? That's immaterial. It's not property. It's safety. It's community. That's not what this topic is about, but you knew that.
You're simply a baiter.
A very good baiter....

How is vested ownership in an area irrelevant? thats what community is all about. I wonder how many people in these high crime areas rent vs. own. People who share a common economic interest form a community. One with less crime because you have a stake in the outcome. Don't try to diminish the importance of ownership by simply calling it bating...

Really not hijacking this thread. I've seen what you do.
A really, really good baiter.

What?...present a logical counterpoint...

I would go so far as to say a master;)

Thanks. :D

someone had to do it

Come on tobra... you said it yourself... the people who live in "these" areas don't have a choice. COMMUNITY: a group of people with shared interests, common ownership,private residences,and agreement to goals...

Ok dan...did I make you use this word?... I just want you to think...think about the definition of the word honestly...

Thanks, Dicks. This thread almost had . . . you know . . . a reasonable discussion from two vastly different viewpoints about a difficult topic.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1295504070.gif

The tragedy here is that the whole event should not have happened.

So who's to blame? It's easy to blame the police but I would question why a warrant was granted in the first place.

IMO, the pelican "community" along with logic and common sense will determine the direction of any real discussion... not so-called baiter's. So again, how can one use the word "community" then turn around and dismiss the very definition of the word?

Right On Brother!

The Trigger Happy Coward (point man) lost focus/failed to properly assess the threat and respond accordingly. And now another innocent American citizen is dead.

Why even shout "Freeze" or "get down" if you are unwilling to give the respondent adequate time to process the command and to comply or not comply?

The real question is, was the Trigger Happy Coward determined to kill (murderous) the first subject who presented himself or was he simply such a chicken schit (cowardly scum) that he fired without provocation simply to save his own skin? And did he do it with the knowledge that he would be shielded (behind a badge/thin fukking blue line) by some despicable supreme court case law that he knew would grant him immunity/impunity???

Determine which of the above holds true or most true and from that we can deduce the most appropriate penalty. (murder, pre-meditated murder, murder under the color of authority, but murder, no matter how you look at it).

Land of the free, home of the dead. All in the name of "The war on drugs."

Several years ago (4), Peyton Strickland, an 18 year old, rich atty's son, living in a rental house (next to a country club) was shot/killed through a closed front door. It was an unjustifiable "show of force" and the officers should have never even been there...wasn't necessary. I think the city of Wilmington paid 4-5 million for that mistake, but that doesn't help Payton Strickland or his family one damn bit. It wasn't that LEO's first "throw gas on a fire" encounter either :(. The "Andy's" (calm, cool, and collected, veteran LEOs) need to clip Barney's wings imo (i.e. take away his bullet)...I know, Mayberry is fiction, but still I can hope :)

But there are also many who sincerely try, and are never able to quite make it out. And that is why police officers do what they do. To protect the people who are peeking out through the blinds. The kids whose parents care more about alcohol and drugs than about their own child's safety and welfare. The people who don't make it out. Those whom are left behind.

The duty of a police officer is to stand up for those who are unable to stand up for themselves, whatever the reason and without question.

Ezekiel 22:30 (New International Version, ©2010)

“I looked for someone among them who would build up the wall and stand before me in the gap on behalf of the land so I would not have to destroy it, but I found no one.

^This^ sort of contradicts your earlier "F these poor people in these poor neighborhood," statement.

Were you just being histrionic earlier?