We should examine the source of the criticism to see if that source is biased. I don't get my news from abcnnmsnbc because they're biased. Why wouldn't anyone take a thread on police violence posted by YOU with the same grain of salt.
You're biased. It's not a big secret. But I don't think you can step back and consider how your bias may be skewing your presentation of the situation.
Police violence is often unjustified, but an article posted by you will always be met with instant criticism because... well... you.
1. I'm not biased. Or at least no more so than any other person coming across a news article saying a woman in her pajamas that called police was shot and killed.
2. So... If I said something wrong, correct it. I post sources and links to my statements and assertions.
3.You're attacking me, not my argument. That does no one any good. I state my position, and you're free to disagree with it, but I expect logic and discourse, not 'your point is invalid because;technoweenie'..
I agree with Steve that we need more info, but the cameras (3 of them) weren't running, which I think is a coverup, but is a HUGE policy violation at the very least, and the agency itself isn't saying shit.
So, as stated.... What we have so far is what was posted....leaks to the media... With lots of unanswered questions and ZERO reasonable explanation of how this could have happened.
Shit, at least give an alternate suggestion as to how you think this might be justified...
Instead I'm being told I'm anti-cop because I want transparency in gov't and people's rights to be observed... And will comment on those situations...
Am I anti judge for calling out judges that sign bad warrants or anti prosecutor for calling out a prosecutor for charging someone with a BS crime?
Just silly that you acknowledge there are problems but ignore the argument surrounding those problems because I'm the one thag started the discussion.
Data is data. Just because I'm a dick doesn't mean I'm wrong. :p
