Criminals break laws.
Criminals would have little problem getting a legal gun or illegal gun regardless of modifications to laws. The black market I'd have to imagine runs too deep by now.
First time criminals would have no problem getting a gun legally.
What, in your opinion would...
In the first photo, there is absolutely nothing behind his right foot.
In the second photo, there is something that could be a lot of things. Where did it come from? Was it his ankle holster removed? Why all of a sudden is the area where his ankle holster is/was blurred out so we can't see if...
Suggesting there is no hard evidence that Scott was holding a gun "outside" of the vehicle, and that it is not evidence that mere words saying that he was is credible evidence.
More money. More harmful junk with unknown near-mid-long term effects = more gain in medical industry. But, the irresponsible need help and as long as they are willing to sign over their own bodies with no skepticism... guess it's more on them. Kind of like slowly aborting themselves.
In my opinion, many just aren't pro-conscience anymore. Too many sick and twisted people with no care for life, cold-hearted, deceived into thinking medical research is so valuable when people just keep getting sicker, while the elite bank.
The problem also that some pro-lifers have are they...
It's a highly unregulated, less transparent, little to no conscience business.
Have to be really naive and guillable to think the industry is all cupcakes and rainbows, honest, isn't connected with all sorts of other medical industries that are worth trillions, make mass profits off of fetus...
What is lacking, in your opinion? Vague response.
You cannot say that the guy was holding a gun outside of the vehicle with no hard evidence, you are found lacking. It is reasonable to think that with all of law enforcement vehicles and dash cams at the scene, not a single one has provided...
I guess a few things we agree on are that it isn't a matter of race, law enforcement can shoot and kill anyone they "believe" is a threat, that they shouldn't be charged for that particular act because it's a law they can always get away with for justification, there was a gun found at the scene...
Beliefs aren't backed up by scientific data. If an officer "believes" someone a threat, they can shoot anyone. They "believe" that someone is a threat. This warrants its justification. Yes that is law. Am I arguing this? No.
Length of establishment is irrelevant.
If someone saw a police...
You really require sources for attorneys or "experts" who disagree with the laws currently in place for police to kill?
There are plenty of litigation meetings, hearings always going on federally and in states to come up with better solutions/alterations to the current laws which "police are...
Well, legal experts and attorneys from all backgrounds from across the country disagree with you also.
What exactly is "scientifically" proven? The gun with his fingerprints and DNA could have been found inside the vehicle. I see no evidence or video of him holding a gun, being threatening, or...
Getting out of a vehicle, no video footage of him holding a gun, (they could made an honest mistake thinking he had a gun in his hands) no threatening action from the guy= shoot and kill?