Originally Posted by CharlesInCharge (Post 8078031)

I know a large percentage of Americans believe in ghosts but thinking that this robot has a soul and the threat justifies a shot to his organs makes me think you may not be mentally stable as well. :concentrate:

Originally Posted by CharlesInCharge (Post 8078382)

I know I used to call people brainwashed robots in the past but if you re-read my post I was talking about the actual robot and making fun of your statement as if the immediate threat was to the robot and for the man to get shot.

If I wanted to quickly confront this guy holding a gun, I would've had one of the guys drive out a prepossessed, drug dealer, bullet proof SUV and tackle him down with the bumper... and not hold up a highway for so many hours or shoot at his mid section.

Originally Posted by Graeme S (Post 8078385)

If that's the case, then your statement was a complete non-sequitur and completely and totally devalues the life of the woman he was holding as hostage. By implying that the police value a robot's utility over the life of a hostage taker and/or a hostage, you are essentially saying that those people are worthless.

No I was having a joke at your statement... you're like "he threatened by death", and you're "not upset at the oppressor getting shot"
- now cue to this scene to where only the robot (which I joke that you think has a soul) is in threat and the police shoot him. get it?:badpokerface:
http://i.imgur.com/bEj8E.jpg


This is an interesting commentary, given you were just a few posts ago criticizing the RCMP for shooting people who are (and I quote) "mentally distressed".


I'm not sure if you'd been keeping up with what was happening in this specific situation, but it seems that the hostage taker in this case had the hostage in his car with him--hitting the car with another would have only caused injuries to both the hostage taker and the hostage, and would have most likely increased the risk of injury or death to both; either an accidental discharge as the impact occurs, or permanent damage from a high speed collision. Remember also that if there is a vehicle moving to batter the hostage-taker's, then he would be able to see it and either kill the hostage and himself out of revenge, or take another similarly foolish action.

I dont know how long into the ordeal he let the hostage free, but he obviously let her go as he's alone in the video for alternative take downs.



While it is easy to sit in judgement of others ("armchair captaining", if you will), the decisions these people face are literally life and death.

While I have at times contemplated a life of service with an organization such as the RCMP or the Canadian Forces, my extreme distress at the thought of taking the life of another has held me back. While these people have overcome the barrier I face, they are by no means emotionless or heartless. They undoubtedly replay in their minds everything that happens again and again, trying to ensure to themselves and to the rest of the world that the decision they made was the correct one. And if it wasn't, what to do in the future if something like this ever happens again.

The system is immoral and if some duty men realize it, I bet most of them stay in it because it pays. Look at the Paul Boyd (bike chain floor crawler) cover up, what if you're one of the officers on the scene.... you're bound to lie.

I realize you look to spread your ideals and your thoughts, Arash. But you should really focus more on convincing people, rather than spouting vitriol.

Originally Posted by CharlesInCharge (Post 8078410)

No I was having a joke at your statement... you're like "he threatened by death", and you're "not upset at the oppressor getting shot"
- now cue to this scene to where only the robot (which I joke that you think has a soul) is in threat and the police shoot him. get it?:badpokerface:

Originally Posted by Graeme S (Post 8078434)

I understand the concept. But it's not a joke. It's only a joke when you consider a human life to be something to be ridiculed. If this is how you feel as a general rule, then I worry that we may never be able to have proper discourse.
My joke also shows your moral compass as no humans were in immediate threat and your acceptance of the man getting shot.

Given that the suspect was free and moving at the time, how was there any way to know whether or not he would have found another hostage?
He released one hostage, do you think others would be lingering around specially when the police have their guns out? I guess you havent seen much hostage movies to see how these scenarios play out.

I used to work in the area, and assuming he was on the street just outside the casino, it would not be difficult to move through the bushes and under the highway to a very well-populated suburban area. I doubt many of the residents are holding grudges over the actions of the police in this case.
We dont need your assumptions, we clearly see he's in the parking lot and with the police all around, he'd need to by pass them to make his journey across... Im also familiar with the area.

With todays technology, even that robot could've shot some kind of taser.. there was no great need to shoot that guy, I dont know why you're trying to justify it.


Indeed, he is free. I would disagree that he is "free for alternative takedowns". Would you suggest, then, that rushing towards a suspect with a loaded firearm is within the normal operating procedure of police forces?
I know murdering people from a distance whom are holding a knife is normal operating procedure of police forces.
You'll note that they fired a weapon at him, and that he fell but was still motile--officers felt sufficiently worried that they also felt they had reason to use the assistance of a Canine unit as well once he reached for the handgun which he had dropped.

If you believe that we should be asking police officers to willingly run into the path of highly unstable individuals holding deadly weapons....well, again, I refer you to the first part of this post.
In bullet proof SUV's is what I thought.


Immorality being relative I cannot agree or disagree with you. When it comes to specific events, again, I cannot speak to them. I can, however, speak to the character of some of the friends of mine who have joined The Forces, and can tell you that they are of the type of individual who would blow the whistle on situations which they do not feel comfortable in.

Its police policy to tase people that are unruly or even when they have their hands up like in the Airport incident.
What ever happened to the good old days when cops would call for backup and break peoples bones like they did with Rodney King, now their trained to just tase people for petty things with the fact that tasers kill by stopping the heart.
Many people hate the police because they're not just... and the system has set this up so that people fear these street soldiers.
Police men need to start their own protests to setup proper standards and gain the peoples trust back... until then I view them as street enforcers, the kings foot soldiers, and an institutional gang.




One, in fact, was "let go" from a security company for complaining about certain supervisory reactions over an incident at her workplace. Strangely, this did not at all affect her application for the RCMP.