(11-13-2018, 11:58 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Even so, is it not common sense to think that the uniformed officers arriving on scene have no idea who is who, especially if the guard is not in a uniform, and will thus treat anyone armed as potentially dangerous?
So you are "speculating" that the officers used common sense?
Do officers that use common sense shoot anyone they consider "potentially dangerous"?
And finally, since you wanted more facts. . .
A police officer fatally shot an armed security guard who was wearing a hat with "security" emblazoned across the front
witness Adam Harris told WGN-TV. "Everybody is screaming out, 'He's a security guard,'"
(11-13-2018, 11:58 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: True, he won't have the same training as an LEO, but he has his armed card, which means he's had firearms training. Even so, is it not common sense to think that the uniformed officers arriving on scene have no idea who is who, especially if the guard is not in a uniform, and will thus treat anyone armed as potentially dangerous?
That makes some assumptions into the situation, though. His level of training, his clothing and even the knowledge of the officers beforehand. He may have thought dispatch relayed that a security guard had the individual restrained, and that information may not have been communcated with the officer. There's a lot of 'what ifs' without a lot of info. We do know people there were saying he was security, which goes back to my thinking that the officer could have had a better response than just shooting.
Quote:Family Demands Video Release After Alabama Mall Shooting Death
The family of Emantic "E.J." Bradford Jr., who died Thanksgiving night after he was shot by a police officerworking security at an Alabama mall, is calling on the Hoover Police Department to release the mall video, witness videos and body camera footage of Bradford's death.
Initially, officials said Bradford was engaged in a fight with an 18-year-old at the Riverchase Galleria Mall in Hoover, Ala. when he pulled out a gun and shot the teen. A 12-year-old bystander also was wounded that night. That night, police and city officials hailed the quick response as "heroic."
In a statement early Monday, city and police officials said they can "say with certainty Mr. Bradford brandished a gun during the seconds following the gunshots, which instantly heightened the sense of threat to approaching police officers responding to the chaotic scene." Body camera and other available video was turned over to the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department as part of the investigation, and the evidence is now with the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency.
"We extend sympathy to the family of Emantic J. Bradford of Hueytown, who was shot and killed during Hoover Police efforts to secure the scene in the seconds following the original altercation and shooting. The loss of human life is a tragedy under any circumstances," the statement continued.
Bradford's family spoke at a press conference Sunday, accompanied by their attorney, Ben Crump.
Crump says several witnesses have come forward since shooting to say the police officer who killed Bradford didn't give any verbal commands to Bradford before shooting him in the face.
Officials also say the shooter could still be at large. Crump says they offered Bradford no medical assistance after the shooting. Family members were tearful at the press conference at Birmingham's Kelly Ingram Park. Several clutched photos of Bradford. At one point, Bradford's grandmother, Althea Pipkin, collapsed and was escorted off as she sobbed over her grandson's killing.
Attorney Crump and the family say it's just another instance of a black man dying at the hands of police. Crump has represented other black men who have died at the hands of police and others, including Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown.
The officer who shot Bradford has since been placed on administrative leave. His name has not been released.
Neither the State Bureau of Investigations, which is handling the investigation, nor Hoover police officials have responded to requests for further comment.
Crump says the family's communication with the police department has been minimal. He says as of Sunday, the family still had not been contacted by Hoover police about Bradford's death. Instead, he says the Bradford family found out about his death through social media.
On Saturday, protesters walked through the mall chanting "Say his name — E.J." and carrying signs that read "Justice for E.J." and "Hoover PD Lied." [/url]
E.J. Bradford Sr., who is a retired Birmingham jail employee, says he considers others in the law enforcement community as family. But he is angered by Hoover's quick conclusion to label his son the killer. Bradford Sr. says he called Hoover police at 12:30 a.m. Friday morning, but they said they would call him back. He says they did not call him before they gave a media briefing and that he has yet to receive a call.
"My son is gone. I can't get him back ... you vilified my son," Bradford Sr. said Sunday. April Pipkins, Bradford's mother, says Thanksgiving will never be the same again. Other family members joined Pipkins at the press conference. One of them was Clemon Brown, who is Bradford's younger brother. Brown says he blames the media for going with early police accounts.
"E.J. was not that kind of guy at all," Brown says. "He was very respectful to his mother [and] his father."
The family says Bradford had been taking care of his father, who is battling cancer. Crump says the family is unsure as to whether they can have an open casket funeral because the police officer shot Bradford in the face. Law enforcement has not yet released any details on the fatal shooting. Crump says in the meantime, they are going to explore every possible legal avenue available on the state and federal level.
"What the family wants most is justice," Crump says.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
Unfortunately people are focusing on attacking the fact that he was honorably discharged because of an injury before serving and never changed his "job" on facebook from the Army.
In their minds if you attack him for being a "fake soldier" then there's nothing wrong with his death.
(11-26-2018, 04:10 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Unfortunately people are focusing on attacking the fact that he was honorably discharged because of an injury before serving and never changed his "job" on facebook from the Army.
In their minds if you attack him for being a "fake soldier" then there's nothing wrong with his death.
I didn't even read that much yet. Always throw some shade on the victim to justify your actions I guess.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
Fun Fact. There is only 1 other time in American History that the NRA has fought for gun restriction laws.. Do you know when? You may have guessed it. When Black people were fighting for rights to own guns.
Quote:"Success doesn’t mean every single move they make is good" ~ Anonymous "Let not the dumb have to educate" ~ jj22
(11-27-2018, 12:23 PM)jj22 Wrote: Fun Fact. There is only 1 other time in American History that the NRA has fought for gun restriction laws.. Do you know when? You may have guessed it. When Black people were fighting for rights to own guns.
Look, I know yall don't like a lot of what I say, and you don't know me to know any better, but I speak the truth. Always do. Even If I can be a little dramatic at times.
Quote:"Success doesn’t mean every single move they make is good" ~ Anonymous "Let not the dumb have to educate" ~ jj22
Look, I know yall don't like a lot of what I say, and you don't know me to know any better, but I speak the truth. Always do. Even If I can be a little dramatic at times.
No, you get criticized for vomiting up talking points and making blatantly false statements. You literally just did this when you stated this;
Quote:Fun Fact. There is only 1 other time in American History that the NRA has fought for gun restriction laws.. Do you know when? You may have guessed it. When Black people were fighting for rights to own guns.
The you post a link to prove your assertion. Except, your own link directly contradicts your points as follows.
Quote:Although it may seem contrary to the ideologies of the NRA in the 21st century, this wasn’t the first time that the NRA—which was originally founded in 1871 with the intention of training Civil War veterans on marksmanship—had supported gun control legislation.
In the 1920s and 1930s, the NRA supported restrictions on who could carry guns on the streets in order to decrease hostility towards European immigrants—who were known to openly carry weapons at the time—within the country. And after the assassinations of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, the NRA backed the Gun Control Act that passed the same year, which put substantial restrictions on the purchase of guns based on mental illness, drug addiction and age, among other factors.
Ironically, it was the gun control laws that were put into effect against African-Americans and the Black Panthers that led “rural white conservatives” across the country to fear any restriction of their own guns, Winkler says. In less than a decade, the NRA would go from backing gun control regulations to inhibit groups they felt threatened by to refusing to support any gun control legislation at all.
So, your own "proof" puts the lie to your initial assertion. Again, you don't get criticized because of your opinions, you get criticized because you are uninformed and bombastic.
If you think a Trump supporter can insult me, you really don't know me. I said what I said and yes, the only time they were ever against gun restrictions based off of a threat of an individual was when it came to blacks.
They've been fine with restrictions when it came to mental illness and drug addiction, age etc. That's nothing new even to this day. I'm talking gun restrictions outside of the normal and obvious law restrictions. You know, for reasons argued today. Not laws already in the books and accepted by all involved.
They were never for restrictions for the sake of restrictions as they were with black people. That argument is in tact. As we've always known they were fine with restrictions for age and everything else you think proves your "point".
And it wasn't until after rural Americans came to the defense of black people the NRA backed down. AFTER!
It'll take more than a couple paragraphs from a link to erase History. Unless you reeeaaaly want it erased. Which it seems you do.
Quote:"Success doesn’t mean every single move they make is good" ~ Anonymous "Let not the dumb have to educate" ~ jj22
(11-27-2018, 12:23 PM)jj22 Wrote: Fun Fact. There is only 1 other time in American History that the NRA has fought for gun restriction laws.. Do you know when? You may have guessed it. When Black people were fighting for rights to own guns.
(11-27-2018, 12:46 PM)jj22 Wrote: I said what I said and yes, the only time they were ever against gun restrictions based off of a threat of an individual was when it came to blacks.
(11-27-2018, 12:23 PM)jj22 Wrote: Fun Fact. There is only 1 other time in American History that the NRA has fought for gun restriction laws.. Do you know when? You may have guessed it. When Black people were fighting for rights to own guns.
This is what lead to the creation of the National Weapons Association who fought for fair treatment for balck gun owners.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: hSP_44wmSZ-hgywm?format=jpg&name=small]](https://pbs.twimg.com/ext_tw_video_thumb/1066413830752927745/pu/img/hSP_44wmSZ-hgywm?format=jpg&name=small)
![[Image: d2wGb4rx_normal.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/737957079697240064/d2wGb4rx_normal.jpg)
![[Image: ap_18328836051473_wide-5cfccc639f81bccd7...00-c85.jpg]](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2018/11/26/ap_18328836051473_wide-5cfccc639f81bccd7ddfb6b59a08d0dbdef42e08-s800-c85.jpg)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
![[Image: ulVdgX6.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/ulVdgX6.jpg)
![[Image: NWA-Guns.jpg]](https://planetill.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/NWA-Guns.jpg)
