As the video shows that is what the young man chose, and that was not to comply, as he reached for a weapon. His choice, he is culpable in his tragic demise.
Their choice was to escalate the situation
The young man didn’t give the police a choice. The video is pretty clear on that.
1 Like
There is no such thing as having no choice in that situation. Talking to him, waiting him out, letting him go. There are three choices right there
In this case, we had a guy behind tinted windows that the cops couldn’t see through. Turns out he had a gun.
“Escalating” the situation resulted in the guy NOT being able to pull that gun undetected and start firing.
What were the cops’ alternative at that point? Just stand around and wait for harm to come their way?
1 Like
Letting him go is a purely stupid choice.
They tried talking to him.
Waiting him out could have resulted in harm to one or more cops.
You’re just tossing spaghetti at the wall here.
2 Likes
You can call it whatever you like. There are multiple ways to talk to him. They are allegedly trained in doing so.
Letting him go isn’t a stupid choice. His only crime was a plate. Not a stolen plate judt a bad plate.
You non-authoritarian authoritarians are an interesting group.
And I did.
They tried. It didn’t work.
Everything you’ve suggested as an alternative is stupid.
That just reflects poorly on you.
Bad plates is a common sign for stolen vehicles. … but just let him go. 
1 Like
That’s quiet the argument - everything you suggested is stupid. Deep too.
It’s not an argument. It’s a description.
Hope that helps!
1 Like
No that’s your counter to my propositions
The are trained in talking. Allegedly. “They tried” is an excuse not an explanation.
Obey or else. From an armed representative of the government.
Not a counter. A description.
Hope that helps!
1 Like
You devolved your own thread. Congrats. 
The word is derailed.
But you have actually provided a great parallel example of what went down in the OP incident. The driver made stupid choices that ended badly for him. But libs say that it was the cops’ fault.
You made stupid choices to post stupid suggestions, and when I called them out for being stupid, it’s somehow my fault.
Lib logic at its finest.
At least you didn’t die from it, and can make smarter choices moving forward. If you want.
2 Likes
Why should they let him go? They had a legal right to pull him over and i was impressed the officer was very clear that he was detained but was calm about it. Cops sometimes sort of dance around that issue but this cop seemed to be very straightforward about it.
I didnt see the officer ask or do anything wrong that didnt seem professional.
1 Like
The officer who first confronted him was very professional. He even tried to diffuse the situation with light humor. Trying to get the driver to relax. Then back up arrived.
1 Like
No devolved. If i wanted to say derailed. I would have said that. You devolved it into a tit for tat. Because of course you did.
you can have the last word now. I am sure it will be as deep as the rest of your arguments in this thread. It’s so much easier to call a position stupid rather than address it. Isn’t it amazing that other posters in this thread and the other thread where this subject was brought up were able to have a discussion without devolving it into these antics. But that’s par for the course.
Prediction
The following words will appear in your post
“Hit close to home”. “Butthurt”
Thanks for the “debate”. 
i look forward to our next one. Truly.
They did talk to him and wait for him to comply, but he chose otherwise. The multiple choice options go both ways and in this case tragically the young man chose wrong because letting him go was not an option. Anyone who gets behind the wheel of a car must have a driver’s license and registration, it’s not optional.
1 Like
All I said was that your suggested options were stupid. I’m not the only one who thinks that.
There’s no tit for tat. I described them. Accurately.
The escalation is totally on the driver.
Why?
…
