Res ipsa loquitur, I’m repeating this title in such a short period of time because it is, what it is.
The predictable verdict has been rendered. Fifty rounds, thirty one of them fired by one specific police officer — thirty rounds, into an unarmed man. I just don’t understand how fifty rounds can leave any doubt.
I’m dumbfounded.
I’m reading the one Sun mention of it.
I haven’t followed the case, not much written about it recently in The Sun — my daily.
Looking at the comments in the article I’m reading caused me to wonder„„ is there no way out of this.
I wasn’t there. I haven’t lived the lives of the officers or their families. I haven’t lived the lives of the deceased or their families.
I have never fired a gun in anger (I have fired a gun), and I have never been in a situation where I might be required to fire a gun in anger.
I am profoundly uneasy about assessing a situation on the basis of the statements of pundits who are proclaiming for their own profit. Instead of the facts, which are difficult to recover at the best of times, and, now that the sides have been chosen and are marching, will be forever irrecoverable.
If We the People are prepared to protest unto violence because a person who is trained to evaluate the facts according to the rule of law did not find in our own sacred favor, do we have the rule of law anymore? Have we not forfeited the privilege of self-government? Have we not provided evidence in favor of despotic rule as the necessary alternative to anarchy?
I believe mandatory examination of a system in which one cop firing thirty rounds into an unarmed individual is justified.
I haven’t kept up with this. Looks like I have to follow it now to see how things progress. My knowledge of the case is inadequate.
Fifty rounds, I know nothing about guns, but that seems excessive many times over.