Cops caught on camera 'executing' criminal (WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT)

VernD said:
Context is everything. You try making sense out of his last sentence then. Then again, you guys think alike so maybe it's more your speed ;)
Click to expand...

read it, using the punctuation.

a lame attempt to insult someone, and ending up with egg on your face because of a lack of basic comprehension skills, is no way to handle a debate.
 
D3x! said:
read it, using the punctuation.
Click to expand...

It's still not making sense due to incorrect punctuation and some missing words mind you.

a lame attempt to insult someone, and ending up with egg on your face because of a lack of basic comprehension skills, is no way to handle a debate.
Click to expand...

No. That's more your style; don't project it onto me.
 
VernD said:
It's still not making sense due to incorrect punctuation and some missing words mind you.



No. That's more your style; don't project it onto me.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously going to deny convicted criminals, as this individual not doubt would have been, unjustly benefit from the laws in this country regarding for example length of sentencing and that it does impinge on the cops ability to "keep the peace"
Click to expand...

Are you seriously going to deny convicted criminals unjustly benefit from the laws in this country regarding for example length of sentencing and that it does impinge on the cops ability to "keep the peace"

as this individual not doubt would have been a convicted criminal.

how is that difficult?
 
D3x! said:
Are you seriously going to deny convicted criminals unjustly benefit from the laws in this country regarding for example length of sentencing and that it does impinge on the cops ability to "keep the peace"

as this individual not doubt would have been a convicted criminal.

how is that difficult?
Click to expand...

'Would have' being the operative word there. Dead men tell no tales.
 
D3x! said:
Are you seriously going to deny convicted criminals unjustly benefit from the laws in this country regarding for example length of sentencing and that it does impinge on the cops ability to "keep the peace"

as this individual not doubt would have been a convicted criminal.

how is that difficult?
Click to expand...

That sentence is a mess and you know it, but I'm going to try and figure it out anyway.

Is he saying that convicted criminals are unjustly benefiting from the laws of this country? Then he needs to come and explain how.

And, if indeed the victim had prior convictions - which still has to be proven - how is it that he was out on the street? He certainly didn't break out of jail, as far as we know, so he must've gotten out through some legal means, which is no error on the part of our justice system.

It's ironic that the very corrupt cops, who you are defending in this thread, are to blame for alleged criminals getting off because of their shoddy police work. Because, the truth of it is, is that criminals don't get off on their own; they get off due to some technicality, that technicality being something that the police didn't do or overlooked during their arrest or investigation.
 
VernD said:
Whilst innocent law-abiding citizens' human rights are being disregarded by their fellow citizens, the enforcers of the law is held to a higher standard, and that is what this is all about.
Click to expand...

The law being enforced is failing to protect the human rights of innocent citizens. Hence people are increasingly willing to tolerate a "lower standard" from cops. If you have laws that don't serve the interests of law abiding citizens don't be surprised when they starting condoning cops enforcing their own personal brand of justice.

I can't make sense out of this sentence.
Anybody else? Or is it just me?
Care to clarify?
Click to expand...

You claimed the laws are not swayed in favour of criminals yet we repeatedly see violent criminals given ludicrously lenient sentences for their crimes. Criminals who once they have served their short terms incarcerated are allowed out to once again infringe on the rights of innocent people. Kinda debunks your claims

But nice attempt to call in the posse for a round of personal attacks.


D3x! said:
a lame attempt to insult someone, and ending up with egg on your face because of a lack of basic comprehension skills, is no way to handle a debate.
Click to expand...

It's an old tactic used around here. The same crowd of a few comrades will head the call and lay into the 'tagged' forumite in an attempt to censor him. It's done because their attempts to pressure the mods into smothering the forum in a blanket of political correctness has so far failed dismally. This is the alternative method.

Will leave this here before bailing....

[video=youtube;-GvNc24yQZA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GvNc24yQZA[/video]
 
Last edited:
D3x! said:
well this wasn't what i typed so don't argue it with me.

was it that hard to comprehend?

eish
Click to expand...

It is what you typed, it was outside of the quote marks stop being obtuse. If corrupt cops of given the right to execute it makes hiding their crimes and collusion with fellow criminals.
 
VernD said:
That sentence is a mess and you know it, but I'm going to try and figure it out anyway.

Is he saying that convicted criminals are unjustly benefiting from the laws of this country? Then he needs to come and explain how.

And, if indeed the victim had prior convictions - which still has to be proven - how is it that he was out on the street? He certainly didn't break out of jail, as far as we know, so he must've gotten out through some legal means, which is no error on the part of our justice system.

It's ironic that the very corrupt cops, who you are defending in this thread, are to blame for alleged criminals getting off because of their shoddy police work. Because, the truth of it is, is that criminals don't get off on their own; they get off due to some technicality, that technicality being something that the police didn't do or overlooked during their arrest or investigation.
Click to expand...

it really isn't, and i explained it so go read.
 
Fudzy said:
It is what you typed, it was outside of the quote marks stop being obtuse. If corrupt cops of given the right to execute it makes hiding their crimes and collusion with fellow criminals.
Click to expand...

no it wasn't, read, seems to be having some comprehension issues today hey
 
Alan said:
I'm sure they do appreciate it's a dangerous road but they've conclude desperate times calls for desperate measures. I know though living in insulated leafy suburbs one does tend not to appreciate what must be like living in areas where crime levels resemble war zones. Most people have simply had enough
Click to expand...

Which is an understandable position, but it doesn't change the legal or moral facts there.

Alan said:
Not my solution I don't condone what the cop did. I'm just pointing out why people do.

You're still making that giant leap from executing violent criminals leading to randomly murdering old grannies as they walk down the road. Even if one were to accept such a rather ludicrous notion I doubt cops would rack up the kills like that violent criminal you'd rather have roaming the streets than dead.
Click to expand...

I haven't made that leap anywhere. The dangers aren't confined to them executing people for illegal things, either. They could have a business deal go bad, off the person and get off scot free. Or shoot their spouse, or whatever. If you don't have the requirement that your life needs to actually be in danger then it falls apart quickly.
 
Alan said:
The law being enforced is failing to protect the human rights of innocent citizens. Hence people are increasingly willing to tolerate a "lower standard" from cops. If you have laws that don't serve the interests of law abiding citizens don't be surprised when they starting condoning cops enforcing their own personal brand of justice.
Click to expand...

The law deems anyone innocent until proven guilty so how can you say that it's failing innocent citizens when it deems everyone innocent? And who are these "people" you are referring to, because it certainly doesn't include me or some other posters here?



You claimed the laws are not swayed in favour of criminals yet we repeatedly see violent criminals given ludicrously lenient sentences for their crimes. Criminals who once they have served their short terms incarcerated are allowed out to once again infringe on the rights of innocent people. Kinda debunks your claims
Click to expand...

Where exactly did I claim that? Please feel free to quote me on that.

And criminal sentences are determined by their convictions. And criminals are let out not to infringe again, but after they have served a minimum of their sentence, or are deemed fit for parole, or have served out their full sentence.
 
If my life was under such severe threat just moments before I'd probably not have acted very rationally myself.

Hope the cops were not covering up something else though by making sure the criminal doesn't talk. I assume one doesn't just walk up to a police van and fire 8 rounds for no reason or history unless it is pure psycho behaviour.
 
Bobbin said:
If my life was under such severe threat just moments before I'd probably not have acted very rationally myself.

Hope the cops were not covering up something else though by making sure the criminal doesn't talk. I assume one doesn't just walk up to a police van and fire 8 rounds for no reason or history unless it is pure psycho behaviour.
Click to expand...

Did you even have a look at the video ?

He didn't walk up to them. He saw them coming and fired off shots in their direction; possibly fleeing the scene of a crime.
 
Last edited:
OMB said:
The fact that many people are prepared to entrust police officers with the power to kill some citizens as they see fit, speaks to a lack of respect for the dignity and rights of fellow South Africans. In other words, it speaks to a lack of humanity on the part of those cheering on the killings.

http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opin...ni-mpanza-must-not-be-valorised/#.Vju4istBvmw

Makes for an interesting read
Click to expand...

Once you arm cops you already entrust cops with the power to kill some citizens. Otherwise disarm all cops. Those guns don't fire sleeping gas.
 
OMB said:
Did you read the article?
Click to expand...

It's not relevant. Once you arm cops you place the power of life and death in the hands of guys with a few years of post matric education and a ton of stress. Do you get this or do you want me to explain in simpler language to you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X