Top Comments
All Comments (574)
-
oscar grant was a killer and he had another baby out side of his marriage
-
Pretty soon a congressmen will soon pass a bill to outlaw it!
-
@tjac59 he shot him in the back like a coward... thats all you need to know... i am white.. jus thought u all should know lol fuck the p.o.s cop... fuckin coward
-
@greasedog Somehow your lies remain at the top of the ratings, so I have to repeat:
1) It does matter what his record was, because he has a very extensive history of resisting arrest, as he did here.
2) He absolutely was not cooperating. He had assaulted 2 officers, and was clearly refusing to give his hands. They did not wrestle with him for 30 secs because it was fun.
3) No, he was absolutely NOT handcuffed, that is a lie.
4) Wrong, he had not been searched.
Obviously, you were never LEO
-
LQQK! People have to take responsibilty for their own actions. OSCAR GRANT was fighting on the bart. If he was such a good dad, he should have been at home with his wife and kid. The real fact is he and his home boys where trying to rob someone and it back fired on them. Oscar went out with a bang. That nigga is (WAS)a thug. and now the family is trying to get 25mill, NOT going to happen. Hes only worth the cost of a cremation
-
@jdorr64 Not to mention they repeatedly refused commands to back off, and 3 of them actually assaulted officers! Yeah, good going folks.
-
@greasedog Oscar Grant was resisting after assaulting 2 cops. That is a fact. Oscar Grant was NOT handcuffed. That is a fact. His past record does matter because it is a clear indication that he has an extensive history of resisting arrest and assaulting officers, that is why his record was admitted into evidence at the trial. He did pose a threat because he would not give up his hands to be cuffed. Literally nothing you said is true in the least.
-
OSCAR GRANT WAS NOT HANDCUFFED, AND THAT IS A FACT!!! Had he allowed himself to be handcuffed, as his friends did, he would have lived to see another day. But he chose to assault officers and resist arrest, as he had done many times before. Check his record. Does that mean he deserved it? ABSOLUTELY NOT! But quit spreading your lies, people.
@zoso1234
1) The officers had no idea what the man's past record was at the time of the shooting. Nor does it matter.
2) Regardless of his record, he was cooperating with the officers when he was shot.
3) He was handcuffed and face down when he was shot.
4) When he was shot, he posed no threat to the officers.
As a former law enforcement officer, I know you don't draw your weapon unless you intend to use it. The officer was wrong! Don't compound the problem through ridiculous rationalization.
greasedog 1 year ago 4
@greasedog
No offense, buddy, but you don't have your facts straight.
First, you don't really know whether he was cooperating with the officers or not. And he was NOT handcuffed--not fully, anyway--at the time of the shooting. (I honestly don't know why people keep insisting otherwise.) Also, you can still pose a threat to others when you are face down, even when restrained to a high degree.
Lastly, you don't have to fire a gun in order to "use" it. So that argument is null, too.
DetectiveCrockett77 1 year ago 2