Why are we praising and rioting over a guy who digitally raped a women (Jacob Blake)?

[Stoner710]

I thought the metoo movement was trying to prevent Women from being raped. Jacob Blake a month prior to getting shot in the back for resisting arrest and going to his car likely to grab a knife broke, into his x girlfriend’s house, and shoved his fingers into his X girlfriend without her consent in front of her son who was sleeping in the bed next to her, and said it smells like you’ve been with other men. And yet we have one our Presidential candidates decide to meet with this guy And his VP Kamala Harris suggested that this was a brave well respected Man And wants the officers to be charged for attempted murder. Hey seriously why are we elevating this guy is it because of the color of his skin I can guarantee you that If a white person did the exact same thing no one would give a shit. if a white person did the exact same thing no one would give a shit. But because he’s a black person we treat him differently that sounds racist to me. Could you imagine if riots and looting broke out because Cops had shot a white person who had digitally raped his ex-girlfriend with her son sleeping next to him a month prior to You coming back and Probably there to do the same thing again. Everyone would be called a racist and a white supremacist If Jacob Blake was a white guy instead of a black.

do you know what there’s another black guy who died who was a honorable and respectful human he goes by the name of Chadwick Boseman, This is a guy who deserves respect this is a guy who deserves are he had colon cancer fight through it did for different high budget movies Fulfilled many wishes cast by children from the Make-A-Wish foundation, never letting on it to his Colon cancer, Let’s honor and up lift people like Chadwick bossmen who lived his life without rapping someone and actually making the world a better place then a guy like Jacob Blake. If you want the country to come together In solidarity and a loss for a guy like Chadwick Boseman

[ZiZi_Bell]

It's not about the guy himself.

It's about the fact that he was shot seven times in the back for no reason.

The cop didn't know what he had done. The cop also didn't know he was going for a knife.

And instead of tackling him, cuffing him, or even just shooting him once to disable him, the officer shot him Seven. Times.

That's unnecessary and ridiculous. Blake wasn't being violent or aggressive. He was simply refusing to comply. And yet he got shot in the back SEVEN times.

And yes, it's because he was black.

How do I know?

Because the next day a video came out from the same town of a white guy in his truck, screaming at a cop, squaring up with him, loudly shouting that he was gonna kill the cop, repeatedly going into and out of his truxk, and yet the cop didn't shoot him.

Blake was walking away from the cop. Didn't make any threats, didn't act aggressively. Just failed to comply and got shot in the back seven times. This other man literally threatened to kill the cop, came at him aggressively, and repeatedly returned to his vehicle that by his own admission contained a weapon. Yet he didn't get shot.

Why?
Because he's white, and Blake is black.

It's not about who Blake is as a person. It's about the fact that he was shot seven times for being black.

[joeldalton]

lol, running around your car in spite of police orders and opening the driver door and reaching for (assumedly a weapon) isn't "no reason". When you have to blatantly lie to get your worldview across, you have a shitty world view.

[ZiZi_Bell]

I like how you completely ignored the part about the white guy blatantly threatening to kill a cop to his face and getting to walk away without even a ticket. Please, continue ignoring how white people get away with that while black people get murdered and paralyzed for much less.

[joeldalton]

That’s completely irrelevant to Jacob Blake’s case. So try again.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Lol how? How is it irrelevant? Jacob Blake had a gun pulled on him, refused to give ID, calmly walked back to his car, and was shot seven times. This random white dude had a gun pulled on him, refused to give ID, shouted at the cop, threatened to kill him, admitted he had a weapon in the truck, got out of the truck and approached the cop aggressively, got back INTO the truck where he said he had a weapon, continued to shout and threaten the cop, and eventually drove off without so much as a ticket. The situations are almost exactly the same. Both involve a vehicle and refusal to give ID. Except the non-aggressive black person was shot seven times, and the aggressive white guy who threatened to kill the officer got zero punishment. How is that different? Please explain that. I'm dying to see how you can explain it without sounding entirely racist.

[jumpercup]

I got into the first sentence and I already know you know nothing of what really happened.

[joeldalton]

He didn’t calmly walk. You’re lying again

[jumpercup]

I'm guessing you didn't see the video of him fighting the cops while having a knife. See this is what you get when people think they can trust the new to show them the facts. You get people ignorant thats there's more than what they've been shown.

[ZiZi_Bell]

What video of him fighting officers? Who's lying now?
There's a video of him struggling with officers and then walking around to get into his car. He had no knife on him. The knife was in the car.
You're calling me ignorant and yet you're literally lying about what happened.

@joeldalton at 30 seconds it shows him calmly walking around his car. You're a liar.
https://youtu.be/eEFsGgbltN8

@jumpercup this is the only other video of the incident before he was shot. It looks like he was struggling, but it's hard to see because it's shaking so bad. What's clear though is that he wasn't fighting them, he went to get into his car, and the cops didn't think he was enough of a danger to chase him immediately. He gets almost all around to the other side of the car before they chase after him and shoot him. He also did not have a knife on him. You are also a liar.
https://youtu.be/eEFsGgbltN8

So, are you going to argue with actual video evidence? Or are you going to keep trying to defend an obviously racially motivated shooting?

[joeldalton]

You’re not calm after getting into a fight with cops. Jesus. But ok, we’ll play the game. You bring up some white guy vs. Jacob Blake. It’s still fucking irrelevant. The incidents were TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF POLICE OFFICERS. Maybe the same cops would have shot a white guy doing the exact same thing as Blake. Maybe the same cops with the white guy you’re pissing yourself about would have been calm with a black guy. Police officers are individuals, they’re not a monolithic entity that thinks and acts the same way. Hell, the same individual person sometimes reacts differently to the same situation twice. How simple minded do you have to be to compare the two?

[jumpercup]

Lol 😆 he wasn't fighting! He was struggling, holy cow!

[jumpercup]

And yes he did have the knife, you can see it in his hand in the video. They found it in the car that he was reaching into after being told multiple times not to do that.

[joeldalton]

@jumpercup oh Jesus Christ. You’re mentally ill.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Fuckin hell. I forgot that trying to argue with racists is like trying to squeeze blood from a stone. Whatever. Live your ignorant delusions. Praise cops for killing people all you want. I'll sleep just fine knowing I'm on the right side of history. Goodbye ignorant children.

[joeldalton]

Lol, the last bastion of someone who can’t formulate an argument...”you’re racists!!!”

[ZiZi_Bell]

Sigh. I showed you video evidence that proved what I was saying. And you ignored it, assumed other things, or just in general ignored it. It's not formulating and argument when you have to lie, make shit up, or twist facts to get you're point across. So yes, I'm not going to continue arguing with you. Because you're not interested in arguing. You're too busy with your bootlicking.

[joeldalton]

You forgot, I’m racist too. Lol. I didn’t ignore it. He was fighting with cops, ignored their commands, hyped up and went around his car to get a knife to attack them. They shot him. Well within their legal rights. End of story.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Sure thing bud. Well within their legal rights to shoot a man who was calmly walking away in the back seven times. Yet ignore the white guy threatening to kill them. Sure. Try not to choke on that boot kid.

[joeldalton]

Lol, calmly walking. Jesus you’re delusional.

[ZiZi_Bell]

That's hilarious coming from you bud. 😊

[joeldalton]

You reach for a knife in your car when surrounded by cops and see what happens, cupcake.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Oh you were there? You saw him reaching for the knife? That's funny, because even the cop who shot him didn't see him reaching for the knife... Or are you just *gasp* making shit up? Who's delusional know, little man? 😊

[joeldalton]

You’re right. He was reaching in the car to give the cop a snickers since he was hangry. Holy shit.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Or... OR... he was just getting into his car so he could leave. Or maybe get his wallet so he could show the cop his ID. Or maybe he was looking for his phone so he could record the interaction. Or or or or or or or... But we'll never know. Because he was shot in the back SEVEN TIMES before he could do anything. If the cop thought he had a knife, why not back up? Why rush in and shoot him point blank seven times? Why not tackle him? Why not shoot him in the leg? Why unload almost half of his magazine into a non-aggressive, unarmed man's back? Please explain that.

[joeldalton]

I’ll answer your questions in order.
1) If they back up, who knows who he would go after with the knife. Could be you as an innocent bystander. Their job is to stop the bad guy from hurting themselves or others
2) You shoot someone to eliminate the threat. Not everyone dies from one gunshot like you see in the movies.
3) Again - knife. Anytime you fight with an armed person you risk getting hurt. Even not, going to the ground with someone opens the risk he takes your weapon
4) This isn’t a movie. You don’t shoot someone in the leg and they’re conveniently incapacitated for the plot
5) See #2.

This video exactly answers your questions better than my text

https://youtu.be/STspPota7es

[ZiZi_Bell]

1: if they back up and he goes after someone then they shoot him. They would then be justified in doing so because he's clearly a threat. There was no one anywhere near them. If they were doing their jobs they would have surrounded him and put themselves between him and innocents. 2: Funny, because how many times have you heard of a cop shooting someone seven times when they had no weapon and posed no threat? Yeah no, that's either panic fire or rage fire. Either way, shouldn't be a cop if those are your reactions. 3: ok so why did they let him get to his car door? They literally let him walk away and didn't do anything to stop him until he was already at the door. If they thought he was a threat they should have restrained him before he got to his door. Again, shit job at being a cop. 4: this wasn't a serious statement. I understand that. I'm just saying that there were other things that could do. 5: again, see 2. Either panic fire or rage fire. Either way, shouldn't be a cop. Once again you ignore half of my comment. Almost like you can't think of an argument against you. Just keep proving how you're the delusional one bud. Lol

[joeldalton]

Watch the video. Your level of knowledge about guns and police is limited to your brain and watching movies. That’s not real life.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Really? So, my CCL, my practice at the range, the classes I've taken on firearm handling and maintenance, they don't mean anything? I have to watch a YouTube video to know what guns do? Wow ok. Thanks for straightening me out! But seriously, is this how you approach every situation? Just assume as much as you can and take that assumption as fact? It wouldn't surprise me. Because thats 90% of conservatives I've talked to. I just wanted to make sure bud. Lol

[joeldalton]

Right, your CCL taught you to shoot once in the leg. Lol.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Lol you're so pathetic bud. Can't actually argue against what I'm saying so you choose one thing that isn't even relevant to the discussion and attack it. Delusional and sad. Go to bed. Lol

[joeldalton]

Oh it is relevant. Because that was one of your very insightful questions as to why the cops didn’t act in a manner you found appropriate. You brought it up. So you either just copy/pasted them form a random website or you thought that question was valid.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Or, it was an escalating string of questions to show how ridiculous the entire situation is. If shooting a non-aggressive unarmed man in the back seven times is a valid way to end a non hostile engagement, then fuck it so is shooting them in the leg. Doesn't change the fact that you're either too dumb or too ignorant to actually argue with me about literally anything else I'm saying. That's why you consistently ignore half of the things I say: because you can't think of a response, because I'm right. Lol But sure, keep clinging to the one sentence I said. That just makes you look even dumber, which I think is hilarious. Lol

[joeldalton]

All of your questions were answered by one video. And none of them related to the reality of situations where guns are used. You have no argument. Other than white cop shoots black man = racism. The cops were legally justified to do what they did. If you were in the cops position with someone that you were in a physical conflict with and the same scenario went down, you’d be justified in shooting also.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Except no I wouldn't, because it was a non hostile engagement. They had no justification for doing it other than the bullshit "I feared for my life". Which is bullshit because cops use that excuse for everything from shooting a man in the back, to shooting a dog through the window of a locked and parked car, yet refuse to shoot white men who active shooters. It's a bullshit excuse used by sick individuals to justify shooting things.

[joeldalton]

A reasonable person would conclude he was going for a weapon. Thankfully there’s still a few of us left in this country.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Ok so what about Dylan Roof? Who actually did have a weapon and had in fact killed several people, yet magically the cops were able to take him alive. What about him? What about Peter Manfredonia? Killed a 62 year old man with a machete, killed another person, then kidnapped a woman. Armed and dangerous, confirmed killed two people. Taken alive. What about the Gregory and Travis McMichael? The two men who chased a black man down in a truck and shot him in broad daylight for jogging? Arrested without harm. What about any of the white mass shooters that we've seen in recent years that were taken into custody peacefully, while armed and resisting? Why weren't they shot? If a man reaching into his car is justification enough to shoot him seven times in the back, why isn't straight up murder justification? I'll save you some time. It's because Jacob Blake is black, and all those other men are white.

[joeldalton]

I’ve already answered that, but here goes again 1) They surrendered without threatening the cops 2) The police officers aren’t the same people. You can’t compare the actions of two different people in two unique situations. The same person may even react differently to the same situation two different ways. But since you want to play it this way, Daniel Shaver was an unarmed white man who made a mistake (because he was terrified) and was killed by police. Therefore since it happened to a white guy, there are no racist cops. We have evidence of both black people and white people killed by police so therefore they’re not racist.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Lmao "It happened to a white guy. Therefore racism is over. Good job everyone." It happened to one white kid. And that's tragic. And only reaffirms my belief that the police need to be defunded and retrained. But that doesn't change the fact that white mass shooters only get killed when they do it themselves. But black men regularly are killed for things like reaching into a car, *maybe* having a fake $20 on them, stealing a bag of skittles, playing with a toy gun that is clearly a toy, sitting in the street with their hands up trying to calm down a special needs student, etc. etc. The problem is systemtic. It's built into the very foundation of the organization, and it's reinforced by both a lack of proper training and a lack of unbiased oversight. And if you cannot see that, you're the delusional one bub.

[joeldalton]

Lol, you’re back to lying and misrepresenting facts of a case to push a narrative not based in reality. Defunding the police is great strategy... unless you actually talk to those black people in the community who are desperate for their children to walk down the street without getting shot by gang bangers. Easy to call for police defunding when you live in the suburbs.

[ZiZi_Bell]

Lol buddy the only one lying and misrepresenting here is you. Have you ever been to a neighborhood like the one you described? Do you realize that cops straight up just don't go there anyway? Which is why the neighborhoods are as bad as they are? Which is why we need to defund the police, reallocate that money to actual training and psychological exams instead of military equipment, and invest in other organizations to work alongside police so that they can focus on the actual violent crimes, with training in how to actually deescalate situations. We also wouldn't have the high school bullies who became cops for the power trip on the payroll. We could then actually afford legitimate non-police oversight so that violent cops are actually punished. Maybe then, if the police were full of people who actually cared about serving the law and didn't have to worry about every single problem in the country, and ya know had more than six months of training, they could actually patrol those neighborhoods instead of letting them turn into gang hives. What a concept!

[joeldalton]

Right. Which is why you haven’t given the full details of any examples of the cops being racist. Just cherry-picked narrative spin. It’s nothing new from the left.

[ZiZi_Bell]

You... you're trolling right? Accusing me of cherry-picking, and that's literally all you've been doing with my responses. You're trolling me right? You can't be both this dumb and this lacking in self-awareness.

[joeldalton]

Lol, you’re not just cherry picking to make a story concise. You are deceiving to create a narrative

[ZiZi_Bell]

Except no I'm not. I've said nothing that wasn't true, and I've omitted nothing that changes the story. You're literally ignoring entire messages because you can't argue them, while twisting and misrepresenting facts. You're literally doing what you're accusing me of doing. How can you possibly be this ignorant?

[joeldalton]

One of your direct quotes was “ playing with a toy gun that is clearly a toy”. Tamir Rice had a BB gun with the orange tip removed. The altered gun looks identically like a real gun. Also, he was pointing it at people which prompted a call to police. The police officer who responded was not told it was a toy, and when he arrived, Tamir pulled the gun out and aimed it at him. So yes, you’re deceptively changing the story to leave out details that don’t fit your narrative.

[ZiZi_Bell]

He did not aim it at them. That is false. One of the prosecutors said there was a faint point of contrast in security images that *could* have been the gun, but the security footage also revealed that the officers didn't even stop to give proper orders, and shot him as soon as they arrived. The one who shot him was even brought up on charges for falsifying his report, and the one driving was brought up on charges for failing to initiate proper engagement tactics. This implies that they knew more than they said they did. If they didn't know that Rice was a child, and if they didn't know that the gun was a fake, they would have approached the situation as if dealing with an active shooter, i. e. pulling up in such a way that they would both have ample cover from gunfire in order to properly assess the situation. And considering no shots had been fired at that point that is exactly what they should have done. Instead they charged in broadside and the cop in the passenger seat shot Rice before he could completely turn to look at them. He pulled the trigger on his gun almost instantly after shouting orders from the inside of the cruiser. Rice didn't even have time to react to what was said before they shot him. I'll admit I forgot the tip had been taken off the gun. But that doesn't change the fact that they shot that child in a drive-by manner without giving him any kind of proper warning or order. And he definitely did not draw and point the gun at the officers.

[joeldalton]

He was also not just a child playing with a toy gun only, either. And the cops didn’t shoot him in a drive-by manner... you just can’t help yourself, can you?

[ZiZi_Bell]

He was 14 years old. He had a toy gun. Someone called the cops and claimed he was pointing it at people. What else was he? A Russian spy? ISIS sleeper agent? He was a fucking kid that made a stupid mistake with his toy. And yeah actually they did. According to the officers testimony he was between the driver and Rice. Which puts the cruiser broadside to the kid. Surveillance footage shows that the cruiser had not even stopped moving before the officer shot Rice out of the open window. I don't know what definition you're looking at, but that's a fucking drive-by. Only difference is they actually stopped, and the gang in question is paid from our tax dollars.

[glock33sig357]

Ok.. so is that worthy of being gunned down? Also what about the Collage student that raped a passed out girl by the dumpster that didn't spend a day in jail because his parents where extremely wealthy, did anyone gunned him down because of his Caucasian complexion or is that only reserved for Ni&&as?

[pigoat]

All these dudes have bad pasts


When are the cops gunna kill a decent well educated black man so the fight cannot seem like a joke

[Kenwoodman]

It is intetesting how after cops kill some black wanker it always works out that the person has criminal past

[centrist]

completely irrelevant to the fact that he was shot. Cop had no idea about any of that.

[Cryptic-Game]

Regardless what he did, nobody has the right to take the law into their own hands and supporters of this are immoral.

[Anonymous]

Uhm dude unless the cop that shot him knew any of that then its not relevant at all to what happened...

[Anonymous]

One word : Politics

[Stoner710]

I mean that’s true I was hoping for a more logical answer, That explained the reasoning behind it

[Opinion Owner]

The dems are using the BLM movement as a political tool to win the election. They are going to support this guy as long as they get the "black vote "

[Stoner710]

That’s interesting because the tactic is failing, the polls show that more black people are siding with trump because of these riots