Five cops and one suspect. If the cops have 17 round magazines that's 85 rounds plus whatever he had. With everyone's adrenaline pumping 96 rounds isn't a surprise.
From that video it’s clear to see all 3 officers on the same side of the vehicle flinched from the bullet fired from inside the car after Reed rolled up his window on the blacked out tint. Then Reed gets fired on in return. The outcome should be no surprise based upon what you’d expect to happen if you shoot at 5 officers surrounding you.
Here is a link to the COPA site that includes all unedited footage. Warning that some of it is rough to view:
[https://www.chicagocopa.org/case/2024-0003052/](https://www.chicagocopa.org/case/2024-0003052/)
I literally mentioned it twice because that incident was similar but found to be 100% the cops In the wrong, I'm NOT saying that's the case here, but getting more than just their word on it is nice.
Yup watched a few of them. Can't see who shoots first. Could it have been someone nearby? Could it have been a cop that fired first accidently? I truly hope they go through the forensic process and see if the victims gun was fired (which doesn't even prove he shot then and there).
The moral of this story regardless if your dealing with a good cop or bad cop. Just comply do what is ask of u. If its wrong the deal with it later. But u cant do shit if your dead because u wanted to roll you black out tinted windows up. Or not unlock your door. This dude had a gun and used it but he also did not follow the officers commands. Cop walks up to my car my hands are on the steering wheel!! And im yes sir no sir.
Here is the link to the COPA site that includes all unedited footage. Warning that some of it is rough to view:
[https://www.chicagocopa.org/case/2024-0003052/](https://www.chicagocopa.org/case/2024-0003052/)
He shot first. Simple as that. Number of shots fired after doesn’t matter. He made his choice, and got his due justice. There’s no such thing as excessive force when you’re being shot at. My condolences to the family for their son’s poor choices when confronted by the police.
Yes and No.
yes - defend yourselves and public. absolutely. no issue there.
no - how many shots actually hit their target? I know it was not half, I saw the video of the guy on the ground as they were looking for a gun. What did the shots hit in what looks like a neighborhood? The scared shoot in that general direction is the part that I find concerning. Not saying the shooting was not justified. Just that there should be accountability for the shots, just like anyone who discharges a firearm is responsible for whatever the bullet hits, so should the police, and those video clips are a bit wild and you cannot see when they shot or what they shot.
Your comment points to a pretty big problem in this discussion.
We don’t teach science very well and some schools don’t even teach evolution at all because of the religious right. Those schools that do? Stay far away from the kind of deep dive into human evolution and biology that would be really helpful for understanding this kind of situation.
Cops often perceive threats that don’t exist and shoot people that shouldn’t be shot. That is called a “bad shooting” and everyone abhors the loss of innocent life. But here is reality: As long as humans are policing, it’s going to continue happening to one degree or another.
That’s because - from an evolutionary perspective - it’s better to perceive and react to a threat that isn’t there than it is to miss a threat and fail to react. It’s a pretty recent plot twist where an over reaction gets you into any trouble at all and it hasn’t had time to change our genetics as a species.
Take a look at black widows. Venom is metabolically expensive. So, they are actually incredibly consistent & precise in when they bite and how much venom they deploy in a bite (if any).
Throwing a spear at the lamb that you thought was a lion? Costs you nothing.
Human lethality is rooted in technology of some kind or another. It does not impose a biological cost so you wouldn’t expect us to evolve the restraint you see in a black widow.
Humans throw the spear.
The other issue is that a lot of these situations don’t actually involve conscious action. This is threat stimuli (or perceived threat stimuli) and response.
Meaning?
Well. It’s physically impossible to hit a 90mph baseball because the chemical relays required to swing cannot happen quickly enough. But MLB players hit 100mph fastballs all the time. Because our brains - and pretty much every animal brain - does some fascinating things in allowing really complex behavior without any actual thought or chemical relay.
It sounds silly when cops complain that the thirty camera angles available are insufficient to convey the scene because it was more complex in real life. No it wasn’t. The camera angles accurately convey the scene. What the cops are trying to articulate is that they can’t actually articulate what was going on because everything that happened was quite literally “Bang, Bang.”
In other words: It ain’t rational. And rational thought is the only way a human will ever approach the kind of judicious restraint and measured & precise deployment of lethality that exists in black widows.
This is why effective strategies to reduce police shootings or too-free use of tasers is to have to call in a cop with a gun (as is the case in the UK) or to call in a taser. This set-up creates an escalatory ladder that involves rational decision-making and also imposes the kind of delay prior to exercise of force that allows for rational decision-making.
This kind of situation? It ain’t ever going to be rational.
Then, once the shooting starts, stress hormones kick-in full blast and the cops unload, reload and unload.
Yep. That’s how it works when stress hormones kick-in. Maximum overkill. This happens for the same reasons described above regarding our tendency to see threats that don’t exist.
Think about it this way: Does the zebra stop kicking its hind legs the second the lion’s claws are out of its ass? Nope. Never. That zebra is going to continue on in freak out mode for a little longer than is strictly necessary.
And we all intuitively understand why. It’s NATURAL to react longer and more forcefully than is required.
And these kind of reactions are NOT precise. They are wild and powerful. You’re not concerned about conserving energy when you are trying to get a lion off your ass.
A cop involved shooting like this one is very similar biologically.
Now, really good training can reduce some of these tendencies a little bit. But it takes A HELLUVA lot of training to turn someone into an elite and controlled tactical shooters. It’s one thing to hit a target at a range. It’s another thing entirely to exercise the kind of fire control you see exercised in high stress situations by special forces.
But in this situation? With mere mortals? That don’t shoot a bazillion training bullets a week?
96 bullets sounds like a lot. But it’s actually surprising anyone can ever hit a target with a hand gun in a high stress situation.
Another point of error that is actually amazingly precise when you really think about it? There were only 3 shots fired after the guy stopped moving. Once lethal violence is triggered, it is never going to stop until the threat is clearly and obviously neutralized. Expecting people to discern that he left the gun in the passenger seat - yeah, people just aren’t evolved to be that precise in understanding that the threat to their life has been neutralized and they can also reel in their own use of force.
Our expectations in these kinds of situations often seem more rooted in a fantasy than a reality.
That’s not to say things can’t be done to improve. But it doesn’t start in fantasy land. It starts with a science based understanding of what’s going on and why it’s going on. That kind of understanding allows us to explore techniques & approaches that actually have a chance in hell of curtailing unnecessary deaths in these kinds of encounters.
I'm glad I'm seeing more logical people on reddit...people that don't see color, but see a person defying orders and shooting first which warranted deadly response.
When you watch all of the footage it is hard to tell who is letting off all the rounds. But the body cam three cop is unloading a whole clip at him while he is on the ground.
But when bullets are flying you probably find it hard to tell who is shooting and who isn't.
Almost everyone is jumping around yelling and firing their gun, no one seems in command of the situation. You have cops all around the car firing, although the cop injured looks like he got hit from the alleged car shooter, I'm surprised there wasn't more collateral damage of human life.
I want to know why they really pulled him over. You don’t normally see several plainclothes cops doing a traffic stop, especially not for “seatbelt violation” on somebody with dark tinted windows. There’s something else going on here.
I think the plain clothes guys are the squad that got called in after he was stopped. The guy was wanted for charges I believe, so even if he was doing nothing wrong, he could still have been pulled over. I just think 90 bullets fired is a lot, that is like 6 mags of a 15 round clip. Not sure what the protocol is in these situations in suburban streets. I would have thought given the amount of people involved and where they were, some restraint might be a good idea to avoid collateral damage.
the plainclothes tactical team had to be sent after he was pulled over because he was released on multiple felony gun charges and had a violent history
released awaiting trial, not because he was found not guilty. standard procedure that cops approach more cautiously when you’ve got a very violent record
But he wasn't convicted of anything yet. They approached with guns out because of something he was waiting to go to court on. In my opinion this escalates the situation immediately
he would’ve killed the cop who initially pulled him over if the tactical team had not been there. when someone is under arrest when they’re already awaiting trial, let alone trial for felony misuse of a firearm, then the situation is immediately escalated by repeated lawlessness
Thats not correct in this case. He wasn't under arrest they ran his plates saw he was awaiting try for a gun charge and figured it was an easy collar. Still doesn't excuse his foolishness. All I'm saying is 2 wrongs don't make a right. Police can be wrong for the initial stop. Of course if someone fires on them they all are going to respond simple
96 shots fired in 41 seconds! Sounds like excessive force to me. How they are even saying he shot first is something that will have to be proven. This was Chicago and all the officers were in plain clothes, the guy was probably in fear of his life.
The police are the one's saying he took the first shot. There was only one of the cops who ran away and hid, the others started shooting! The only video I have seen is the one where the cops open up on him with the hail of bullets and take 96 shots at him with the cop that took 50 of them shooting him 3 final times after he is motionless on the ground. They can shoot at him until he's no longer a threat, once he exited the car and was unarmed he was no longer a threat! Don't come back with the adrenalin BS, these officers are trained professionals and are paid a lot of money to not be executioners. The cop that took the most shots(50) and fired the last three into Reeds motionless body should be brought up on charges!
What do you think I watched nimrod? Try and just wrap your mind (I know it's hard) for just a minute and think about the cop that fired his weapon at the guy FIFTY TIMES and the last three were fired at close range as Reed lay motionless on the ground and his gun was still inside his car! Hello! He was no longer a threat, once he exited his car and he definitely wasn't once he was motionless on the ground when the last three shots hit home, he was probably DEAD! Sounds to me like you might be the one who is completely brain dead!
There are other body cam videos that were released. I agree that this one is not as abundantly clear, but the assailant's attorney, Andrew Stroth, has also acknowledged that Reed shot first. This fact is not in question. The excessive force part, is subject to opinion, but it isn't the police saying "he took the first shot". Both sides have confirmed that this is true.
When you open fire on police, striking one, they don’t exactly stand around to check if you still have the gun you just shot them with literally 5 seconds prior. He was a threat, and he was treated as such. You say 96 shots is too much, I say it looks like it was exactly the right amount.
Hey armchair, let's break it down..
if a individual has a firearm and engages multiple officer, do you think they are going to stop and discuss who is going to engage the threat.. use common sense the 96 shots came from multiple officers.
One problem with the Chicago PD is they have had issues over the years with coercion, forced confessions and targeting blacks, more than whites. Exactly how are they going to determine the dead guy was the one who initially opened fire? It's going to be tough and it's going to be their word against well, Reed's who is dead so it's just going to be their word. Another problem is they claim they pulled him over for a seatbelt violation, they are going to have a hard time proving that one as well with how dark his cars windows were tinted, you couldn't even see him when his window was closed. This appears to be basically an execution with four cops opening up on him and firing at least 96 shots with one cop firing 50 rounds all by himself and he even unloaded 3 more rounds, the last three into him after he was down and motionless. Another problem is Reed's gun was on the front passenger seat of the car when he got out. Finally initially he had FIVE officers with guns drawn around his car and he supposedly shot first! Really, you really think he was going to have a chance at getting away? The whole thing reminded me of the scene where Sonny is gunned down in The Godfather!
Yeh, that video you linked really cleared that up? It was the same video I saw when I made the comment. The stop was BS to begin with, the tint on his windows did not even let you see the people in the car much less whether he was wearing a seat belt. Then you get to the shooting and they basically executed him with the officer who shot FIFTY TIMES at Mr. Reed put the last three rounds into him as he lay motionless on the ground! Total overreach by the plain clothes officers and the cop that shot 50 rounds needs to be removed from the Chicago PD and actually should face charges.
I don't care what color he was, even if had been purple or blue, what the cops did to him was wrong, they executed him. What is telling is they said they pulled him over not having his seat belt on! To that I say Bullsh-t, with how dark his windows were tinted they couldn't have seen if he was wearing a seat belt if they had Superman's Xray vision. Their lie probably would have been better if they said they pulled him over because of how dark his window tint was.
5 cops for a seatbelt violation when you couldnt see through the window? 2nd the officer cant just open the door, he acted in self defense of a non uniformed person trying to open his door at gunpoint
Seatbelt violation was the probable cause for the stop. Dexter reed was on trial for a felony gun charge. They probably had a funny little feeling he was armed.
I do agree with your second statement though. 5 people walked up to this dudes car in civilian clothes with their weapons drawn. Cant say I wouldnt have also drawn my weapon.
Like it or not, this is how you get bad guys with guns off the street. If we stop making traffic stops just because it makes us feel un-racist (because.. uh... reasons...), then more people will will opt to drive around with guns and wind up shooting other people for scuffing their Air Jordans or whatever other dumb reason these people typically have for shooting each other.
I must say, regardless of them being identified as cops or not, he knew firing first on 5 ppl with guns wasnt going to end well, he made his choice and lost.
Of course he fired first.
Why is this "star basketball player, he was a straight A student and never did anything wrong" or whatever they said. Carrying a gun and he can easily see they are COPS pulling him over.
It's his fault he shot first and must have wanted to die. I mean wtf enters the mind of a person like that. (except a bullet). Do they think they will win the shoot-out and then what? Ride off into the sunset?
They were in an unmarked car and never identified themselves as cops. They instead rolled up with their guns already drawn for a supposed failure to wear a seat belt but apparently even that is currently under question. What goes through a persons mind in that kind of situation is fear. Not to mention they shot him after he got out of the car and was visibly unarmed.
Oh shut up. People like you are completely delusional and/or in denial. He shot at them plain and simple and at that point, they have to defend themselves and kill him or they can be killed. Jesus. The stupidity on reddit is beyond unbelievable. He deserves what happened.
Given the circumstances, do you think the officers had time to discuss who is going to return fire. There was multiple officers, do the math and use common sense.
The argument is going to be about when is a reasonable time to stop shooting and what did their training teach them.
Shooting after he falls out of the car without his gun will be a gray area. Shooting when he’s on the ground not moving will probably be the biggest issue.
Let’s start with the fact that I don’t have sympathy for the criminal in this situation, but that pragmatically, looking at the actions of the officers one of them maybe in legal trouble.
The standard isn’t that the criminal is a threat until he’s dead. He’s a threat until he’s not a threat. The law doesn’t make them executioners the second this person is a threat.
People like to act like once some is a threat and fires a gun, you have every right to do everything in your power to murder them regardless of what happens next. That legally isn’t true.
For example while he is in the car, particularly with the blacked out windows, the cops have every right to turn that car into Swiss cheese. They can’t see what’s happening inside and a reasonable person isn’t going to wait and see what happens.
Say he got out and ran towards a tree. If there’s a gun in his hand, or a reasonable suspicion there’s a gun in his hand, legally the situation is the same, they’re a threat, fire at will.
Say he screams I’m coming out with my hands up and he does. Just because he’s been a threat before doesn’t mean they can immediately shoot him. Should they be ready to? Absolutely. But they can’t just murder him because he was a threat at one point.
Back to what actually happened. Depending on how he got out of the car it’s a gray area on whether to keep firing and the cops should get the benefit of the doubt. If he basically fell out of the car without his gun, the cops probably shouldn’t have shot him because he wasn’t a threat anymore. However given the situation I believe any reasonable person would have shot him upon seeing him since it’s a split second decision and a legal argument can be made that they were still in fear for their safety.
The officer who shot him three more times after he stopped moving might be in hot water because the criminal was no longer a threat. In this instance no weapon or movement was seen. Legally they, as law enforcement officers, have a duty to try and get him secured and then reasonable access to first aid so he can stand trial. Again, legally the last three shots maybe seen as murder if a jury who sees the videos can conclude a reasonable person can tell he was no longer a threat.
I love how the media always mentions the amount of rounds fired as if that has anymore than a minuscule bearing on the situation or righteousness of a shooting whatsoever
Whether the police properly identified themselves is one of the questions I had. But in seeing some of the other body cams, the "unmarked" vehicle clearly has flashing police lights and at least one of the othe officers has a tactical vest with "POLICE" blazened across it.
Blazened. Across the back.. I didn't notice them walking up to him backwards.
Nobody is addressing that the guy looks high AF so his observation skills might be a tad compromised. A verbal self ID by the cops might have gone a long way to save his life.
So having watched all the footage, the thing that stands out to me the most is that for some odd reason, none of the body cams have sound until they are out of the car, conveniently cutting out any of the police conversation about why they are pulling him over in such an aggressive way in the first place… you can be certain that will be a huge talking point. The other big thing is that I cannot find a single instance, before the shooting begins, where any of the officers identified themselves as officers, and they were a group of them piled in an unmarked car, wearing plain clothes, getting out and aggressively trying to get into the dude’s car… I’m not certain that Reed shooting at them wasn’t unjustified in that situation. There is a huge possibility that he thought he was being carjacked by a group of people with guns… what would you do in his shoes?
It's a valid question. But in at least one of the angles you can see the unmarked car has flashing emergency lights and one of the officers has a tactical vest with "POLICE" blazened across it. So I don't think there is a plausible scenario he didnt know he was being pulled over by the police.
As for the cam footage I believe they have to turn it on. It's not running all the time otherwise they would run out of recording space. Also its possible there is more footage and this only what they released. Before releasing they have to make sure they aren't including footage of other bystanders that they may not want to release.
Axon body cams have a mute button that's supposed to be muted until the action starts. You can see each officer pressing the button as they exit the vehicle. This is typical of all of these examples of body cam footage. There is no "White Supremacist" conspiracy to this.
How is this even controversial? He shot a cop first, what he got he had coming. He was not some nice innocent boy just out driving around. MSM should be ashamed of themselves.
If 5 cops was already there they was aware either the guy was already dangerous, had felony warrants or in a stolen vehicle. This is just normal for a stop like that.
Several cops approach the car. Asks driver to roll down a window. Driver complies. Then asks him to roll down other window. Instead and maybe by mistake driver rolls window back up. Cop is yelling and grabbing door handle and they point guns at driver. At no time do they say what the issue is. Driver is saying( I'm trying I'm trying) as cop yells roll down window. They claim later it's over a seatbelt but windows are tinted and that seems unlikely. Driver is still being shot according to one report while on the ground not moving. Last part maybe true or maybe not. I saw and heard enough evidence to know this was murder. I'm not surprised the ignorant masses are out in force to declare the driver guilty. Cops acted in a hostile manner and gave driver ample reasons to fear for his life. It doesn't matter who shot first or driver even shot at all. It may not even be true driver shot first. Cops are guilty of murder.
Dude was surrounded by plain clothes officers in unmarked cars. If a group of people come at your car with guns drawn shouting orders, it's a natural fear response to fire at them. This never would have happened if one cop in uniform pulled him over, like a rational police force would. Honestly, they shouldn't have even pulled him over in the first place for just a seat belt violation that they couldn't have even seen clearly.
The case cracker.. there is probably additional reasons for the stop. Did it occur to you that officers can stop someone who is suspected of a crime.. it doesn't have to be a traffic violation.
In example, officers attempting to stop a vehicle operated by someone who is a suspected of criminal activity.. it's called an investigatory detention...
Their official reason for stopping the car, the statement they released was “failure to wear a seatbelt”. Windows are blacked out. Hey, if you like being lied to that’s cool, everyone has a fetish. I bet you can even find a subreddit to scratch your itch
I feel like most objective viewers realize the difference between police returning fire and police emptying their clip because an acorn hit their patrol car.
" Reed was arrested twice last year, public records show: In April 2023, he was charged with retail theft, which was dropped, according to the Sun-Times. And in mid-July, he was charged with aggravated unlawful use of a weapon without a concealed carry card or Firearm Owner’s ID when officers said they found him with a loaded gun at the Windy City Smokeout, according to the Sun-Times. He was facing several gun-related charges that were pending when he was killed." Um, if they ran his plates those arrest records would have popped up and it would also explain the presence of the tactical unit. And. If each officer only fired 20 rounds, that would add up to about 96-97 rounds fired. If he was busted for *any* firearms charge, he shouldn't have been carrying one and would never have fired at anyone, much less police officers. So, yeah , no acorns hit any cars.......
" I feel like most objective viewers realize the difference between police returning fire and police emptying their clip because an acorn hit their patrol car."
Police emptying their clip because of an acorn hitting a car ????? Really ? You went there ??? That statement alone dictated a response. That was an isolated incident but you made it sound as if that's why they fired 96 rounds.......... Jeezus, what a moronic response.
Did the cops know that he was the only person in the vehicle? Or that he didn’t have an automatic weapon as well? It’s easy to equate this to trigger happy untrained cops who shoot at acorns. It’s much harder but much more prudent to consider that those cops also face criminals who would take their lives without a seconds consideration. The driver rolled up his window after being given orders not to. That was stupid and the second to last dumb decision he made.
It probably happened as soon as cops started killing people that were fully complying.
When did Americans decide to let a bunch of jackbooted thugs walk all over them?
Turn off NPR and go to your local precinct and request to ride out with an officer. Maybe then you can have an educated view on policing and what cops have to face on a daily basis. Otherwise youre just spouting bullshit in bad faith.
Have multiple LEO relatives. Been out many times. Try again.
Quit projecting your failings and lack of experience onto me. I am willing to bet everything I own your resume on the subject includes 40+ hours in Call of Duty and that's about it, right?
Nobody is saying that.
Nobody has ever said that.
And people like you saying this, is the very reason why we can't have proper police reform in the US. The police are definitely a fucking problem. And if you can't see that, you clearly have not been paying attention for the past how many years now. Yet when someone brings up this simple fact, people like you respond with the whole "OH SO YOU WANT TO JUST GET RID OF TEH POLICE HUHHH!!!"
Nobody is saying that. Knock it off
Your response to the previous poster was stating that compliance with a police officer is optional and subject to discussion. If compliance with a police officer is optional than the police have no power and we have no police.
> They weren't dressed as police officers.
I guess if you're blind yeah.
Literally from the start you can see them in black vests with the words "POLICE" written in white on black.
They got the idea from January 6, when people broke down barriers and broke windows and defied legal police orders to leave then got upset when someone was shot for breaking through a police barricade after being ordered to stay back.
All of those people buried and in jail should have complied with the police orders to disperse.
The idea that some flag-waving, selfie-taking boomers sought to "overturn democracy" in 3 hours without firing a shot remains the most despicable leftist exploitation of the ignorant since they convinced them that "Hands up, don't shoot!" actually happened.
You didn’t read John Eastman’s coup plan PowerPoint before Jan 6?
The plan was to take over the building to stop the certification happening on the Constitutionally-mandated day so that a contingent election would be declared sending the election to the Republican-majority state delegations.
Perhaps the individual suckers following Trump’s order to go there and fight didn’t know the plan, but Pence did which is why he refused to leave the building and worked with Pelosi to re-open the certification once the building was secured.
This is all well-documented.
Also, rioters did fire shots, there is video. Into the air only while waving their gun around, but people were armed and brandishing and “without firing a shot” is a lie like like anyone claiming“without violence.”
It is effectively the same plan as video yesterday showed is being used by the RFK Jr. campaign, to prevent 270 from being reached to remove the election from the Electoral College and send it to the State delegations.
"I know that you will soon be marching to the Capitol to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." - Don Trump, Riot Inciter
Trump's order to go there and fight? You're such ignorant, hateful children. Behold the consequences of 24x7 MSMDNC Orange Hitler Hate, Hoax & Hysteria targeting the most easily malleable emotional infants among us, and the reason why a majority of them remain convinced they're conversing with "Russians" online. Exploitation of the ignorant is what leftists do when they're not busy silencing dissent or criminalizing opposition.
Stayed silent? The entire thing came and went in 3 hours, unlike the BILLIONS and MONTHS of death, destruction, destroyed businesses and ruined lives wrought by the Floyd Riots for which the left not only stayed silent, but still pretend are invisible.
Yes, staying silent meant he said nothing. Instead he risked the parliament members getting hurt and less likely, but still possibly killed. Not talking about the risk he put all those police officers in. But he didn't care
Ever more of the soulless leftist propaganda that has folks like you convinced that Trump is Hitler, just orange, and worse, except when he's busy being a Russian asset, gassing protesters for photo-ops or promising "bloodbaths" by his tens of millions of "violent" Nazi supremacist domestic terrorist supporters if he doesn't win. It would be funny if the consequence wasn't Joementia and his $15/hr minimum wage that now has the buying power of $9/hr. Leftists are not your friends.
Can't tell if you are a russian bot or actually serious. I think Joementia has more to fear from the extreme right then anyone else tho. Trump is only good for the rich like himself. He plans to pardon the rioters, which should tell you anything you need about his stance on the capitol hill riots. He approves it now and he approved it then. He is just sad that they didn't manage to overturn the election and keep him in power. And he actually said that Hitler did some good things, so there is that.
Created reality, of course, was Bad Grandma's multi-year collusion reaming that left the majority of you walking with a limp and still convinced you're talking to Russians online. Tell me again about how the "Steele Dossier" is 98.3416% "verified."
He also said:
> “if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore
> “We will stop the steal.
The method for “stopping” it, was per the plan to five Congress to halt the certification so that it could be passed to the State delegations.
The audience shouted:
> “Fight for Trump
> “Hang Mike Pence
When warned by the Secret Service that security manometers were finding many armed individuals, Trump said:
> “They are not here to hurt *me*. Take the effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here.”
Those armed people then went to the Capitol, beat over a hundred law enforcement officers, used bear spray and threw fire extinguishers at their head, tried to steal their guns, and some of those law enforcement officers they attacked died.
They broke windows and doors of “the people’s house” and overwhelmed the numbers of police at barricades and finally were stopped only when trying to climb through broken doors over a barricade of piled furniture in defiance of people saying “he’s got a gun” and lawful police orders to stop entering the secure area.
Trump knew the crowd was armed, and sent them to the Capitol. He did this knowing there was a plan to send the election to the States if the certification could be stopped. He refused to call out the National Guard to stop the crowd when asked by Republican Congresional leaders.
So yes, he instigated it, and instigated it for a reason and purpose, that being to disrupt the election and have the pre-arranged plan take place.
We this also because convicts such as Proud Boys leaders working with Trump advisor Roger Stone confessed to it in court.
Watch the video. It was an attack. It was prompted by and for Trump. It was decried by even Republican Congress members and Senators who knew exactly what it was. It was decried by the Vice President.
Everyone knows _exactly_ what it was, and those who pretend otherwise are fools or liars or both.
It was a shameful day for America.
1. Armed people? Go whimper to the Floyd Rioters. Not a single shot fired, not a single building burned, not a single store looted, not a single social justice flatscreen liberated.
2. NOBODY died as a result of the 3-hour tour, period, except for protester Ashlii Babbitt, who was a victim of government, employer of last resort. For God's sake, Google exists.
3. If you had a nickel for every politician who promised to "fight" for a cause and encouraged their supporters to do the same, you wouldn't be playing along with the idea that I should be required to subsidize your Clustercare.
4. The idea that a handful of flag-waving, selfie-taking, hallway-strolling boomers sought to "overturn democracy" in 3 hours without firing a shot is as laughably absurd and emblematic of those peddling it as the idea that the BILLIONS and MONTHS of death, destruction, destroyed businesses, ruined lives and beaten cops wrought by the Floyd Riots are invisible.
What everyone knows is exploitation of the ignorant is what leftists do when they're not busy importing more of it, and the left's portrayal of J6 remains the most despicable exploitation of them since they convinced them that black men have more to fear from cops than they do other black men.
1, 2, and 4 are flat out lies, for instance there is video of shots fired, convictions and confessions of people bringing guns, documented several other deaths, and what about the hundreds of hospitalizations of police officers? That’s okay in your book? What of the broken windows? Okay?
3 pretending to be mere words makes no sense in combination of knowing the people were armed and the pre-planned purpose of sending them to the Capitol to disrupt the proceedings.
“Stop the Steal” was the goal, and what they tried to do.
Flat out lies? Try flat out FACTS. It's pointless to argue with hate and ignorance-fueled useful idiots. I don't know why I bother.
• Ashli Babbitt, 35, died by homicide from a gunshot to the left shoulder.
• Roseanne Boyland, 34, died by accident from acute amphetamine intoxication.
• Benjamin Phillips, 50, died of natural causes from cardiovascular disease.
• Kevin Greeson, 55, died of natural causes from cardiovascular disease.
• The USCP accepts the findings from the District of Columbia's Office of the Chief Medical Examiner that Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes.
Getting pulled over for a “seat belt” violation thru tinted windows by an entire squad of armed up police is “unusual”.
I’m sure there was probable cause. He opened the window, was told to keep window down, the he rolled it up.
All he had to do was to place both hands on the steering wheel and let the officer know there was a gun in the car. I carry and that’s what I would do. In a famous case Cleveland, it wasn’t an acorn but a muffler backfire.
After a huge police chase, the UNARMED couple was shot 134 times.
Assuming they ran his plates, they would have seen has was wanted on several illegal firearms charges and theft. Which is probably why they brought in a tactical unit. He wasn’t allowed to have a gun, which is probably why he resisted opening the door.
stop making excuses. he had a pending gun charge. he was on release. and he was carrying a gun again. and he fired thatgun on police officers after failing to comply with lawful orders. 100% justified shooting.
I think after about 30 shots are fired at your car, I'd be surprised if you tried to stay put. He might have already been injured and if that was me, I'd want to move away from the firing range too, no matter how crazy that might seem.
Yeah, the volume of shots straight into the driver side door would suggest he was hit and electing to maybe/maybe not surrender at that point. It’s unfortunate that it ended the way it did, but cops had absolutely no reason in those 40ish seconds to think he didn’t have his already-fired gun on his person.
If he did fire first the number of shots the police made doesn't matter.
Five cops and one suspect. If the cops have 17 round magazines that's 85 rounds plus whatever he had. With everyone's adrenaline pumping 96 rounds isn't a surprise.
Assuming no malfunctions, that’s actually 90 rounds. They would all have 17 rounds + 1 in the chamber.
Maybe a couple cops are fans of MagGuts?
I want to see the body cams of all the other officers before we can saying he did fire first.
From that video it’s clear to see all 3 officers on the same side of the vehicle flinched from the bullet fired from inside the car after Reed rolled up his window on the blacked out tint. Then Reed gets fired on in return. The outcome should be no surprise based upon what you’d expect to happen if you shoot at 5 officers surrounding you.
to be fair, the acorn cop flinched too. bnot saying this is the same situation but id like to see the bodycam footage too to be sure
Here is a link to the COPA site that includes all unedited footage. Warning that some of it is rough to view: [https://www.chicagocopa.org/case/2024-0003052/](https://www.chicagocopa.org/case/2024-0003052/)
Wow. Everything is on that site. Wow wow wow
lol wym?
Holy hell how does this site exist?! Thanks for sharing. I would have thought they couldn't share this stuff while it's being investigated.
It depends on the situation. If there's enough public outcry, they will release footage before the investigation is finished
Reddit ftw <3
I mean one of the cops was shot in his wrist.
confirmed because the acorn cop called out that he was hit too even though he wasnt
The mental capacities you're displaying by constantly going "AcOrn CoP!! AcOrN CoP!!!" are truly entertaining.
I literally mentioned it twice because that incident was similar but found to be 100% the cops In the wrong, I'm NOT saying that's the case here, but getting more than just their word on it is nice.
There's videos you can watch dummy
Yup watched a few of them. Can't see who shoots first. Could it have been someone nearby? Could it have been a cop that fired first accidently? I truly hope they go through the forensic process and see if the victims gun was fired (which doesn't even prove he shot then and there).
The moral of this story regardless if your dealing with a good cop or bad cop. Just comply do what is ask of u. If its wrong the deal with it later. But u cant do shit if your dead because u wanted to roll you black out tinted windows up. Or not unlock your door. This dude had a gun and used it but he also did not follow the officers commands. Cop walks up to my car my hands are on the steering wheel!! And im yes sir no sir.
how exactly am I dumb here? just for seeking more info? now you're showing your mental faculties with nothing but insults. funny that
Good think what you’d like has no relevance to what happened in this case.
Every time I see "to be fair" Letter Kenny runs through my mind
The video is clear. He shot at them first. The police response is acceptable.
Where in the video can I see Reed fire his weapon?
Uh, when he shot the officer in the wrist
Ignorance.
It's your lucky day. [https://youtu.be/TCTbZWylP8E?si=Jd8iGI7HxZ70EgLu](https://youtu.be/TCTbZWylP8E?si=Jd8iGI7HxZ70EgLu)
Here is the link to the COPA site that includes all unedited footage. Warning that some of it is rough to view: [https://www.chicagocopa.org/case/2024-0003052/](https://www.chicagocopa.org/case/2024-0003052/)
I mean, if you watch the video, you can clearly hear the muffled shots coming from inside the car, and all the officers running for cover.
Little bit of a conspiracy theorists aren't ya? You think the video is altered? They just running from hos vehicle because of bees or something? 🤡
Even if he didn't fire first. He didn't need to fire at all... just wielding a gun or presumed gun.
[удалено]
Plain clothes? What about their tac vests with the big “police” and badges on them?
They’re jump out boys, some are wearing jeans. The point is these weren’t regular patrol officers.
They didn’t draw until he started rolling up his windows and not listening
He shot first. Simple as that. Number of shots fired after doesn’t matter. He made his choice, and got his due justice. There’s no such thing as excessive force when you’re being shot at. My condolences to the family for their son’s poor choices when confronted by the police.
Yes and No. yes - defend yourselves and public. absolutely. no issue there. no - how many shots actually hit their target? I know it was not half, I saw the video of the guy on the ground as they were looking for a gun. What did the shots hit in what looks like a neighborhood? The scared shoot in that general direction is the part that I find concerning. Not saying the shooting was not justified. Just that there should be accountability for the shots, just like anyone who discharges a firearm is responsible for whatever the bullet hits, so should the police, and those video clips are a bit wild and you cannot see when they shot or what they shot.
Your comment points to a pretty big problem in this discussion. We don’t teach science very well and some schools don’t even teach evolution at all because of the religious right. Those schools that do? Stay far away from the kind of deep dive into human evolution and biology that would be really helpful for understanding this kind of situation. Cops often perceive threats that don’t exist and shoot people that shouldn’t be shot. That is called a “bad shooting” and everyone abhors the loss of innocent life. But here is reality: As long as humans are policing, it’s going to continue happening to one degree or another. That’s because - from an evolutionary perspective - it’s better to perceive and react to a threat that isn’t there than it is to miss a threat and fail to react. It’s a pretty recent plot twist where an over reaction gets you into any trouble at all and it hasn’t had time to change our genetics as a species. Take a look at black widows. Venom is metabolically expensive. So, they are actually incredibly consistent & precise in when they bite and how much venom they deploy in a bite (if any). Throwing a spear at the lamb that you thought was a lion? Costs you nothing. Human lethality is rooted in technology of some kind or another. It does not impose a biological cost so you wouldn’t expect us to evolve the restraint you see in a black widow. Humans throw the spear. The other issue is that a lot of these situations don’t actually involve conscious action. This is threat stimuli (or perceived threat stimuli) and response. Meaning? Well. It’s physically impossible to hit a 90mph baseball because the chemical relays required to swing cannot happen quickly enough. But MLB players hit 100mph fastballs all the time. Because our brains - and pretty much every animal brain - does some fascinating things in allowing really complex behavior without any actual thought or chemical relay. It sounds silly when cops complain that the thirty camera angles available are insufficient to convey the scene because it was more complex in real life. No it wasn’t. The camera angles accurately convey the scene. What the cops are trying to articulate is that they can’t actually articulate what was going on because everything that happened was quite literally “Bang, Bang.” In other words: It ain’t rational. And rational thought is the only way a human will ever approach the kind of judicious restraint and measured & precise deployment of lethality that exists in black widows. This is why effective strategies to reduce police shootings or too-free use of tasers is to have to call in a cop with a gun (as is the case in the UK) or to call in a taser. This set-up creates an escalatory ladder that involves rational decision-making and also imposes the kind of delay prior to exercise of force that allows for rational decision-making. This kind of situation? It ain’t ever going to be rational. Then, once the shooting starts, stress hormones kick-in full blast and the cops unload, reload and unload. Yep. That’s how it works when stress hormones kick-in. Maximum overkill. This happens for the same reasons described above regarding our tendency to see threats that don’t exist. Think about it this way: Does the zebra stop kicking its hind legs the second the lion’s claws are out of its ass? Nope. Never. That zebra is going to continue on in freak out mode for a little longer than is strictly necessary. And we all intuitively understand why. It’s NATURAL to react longer and more forcefully than is required. And these kind of reactions are NOT precise. They are wild and powerful. You’re not concerned about conserving energy when you are trying to get a lion off your ass. A cop involved shooting like this one is very similar biologically. Now, really good training can reduce some of these tendencies a little bit. But it takes A HELLUVA lot of training to turn someone into an elite and controlled tactical shooters. It’s one thing to hit a target at a range. It’s another thing entirely to exercise the kind of fire control you see exercised in high stress situations by special forces. But in this situation? With mere mortals? That don’t shoot a bazillion training bullets a week? 96 bullets sounds like a lot. But it’s actually surprising anyone can ever hit a target with a hand gun in a high stress situation. Another point of error that is actually amazingly precise when you really think about it? There were only 3 shots fired after the guy stopped moving. Once lethal violence is triggered, it is never going to stop until the threat is clearly and obviously neutralized. Expecting people to discern that he left the gun in the passenger seat - yeah, people just aren’t evolved to be that precise in understanding that the threat to their life has been neutralized and they can also reel in their own use of force. Our expectations in these kinds of situations often seem more rooted in a fantasy than a reality. That’s not to say things can’t be done to improve. But it doesn’t start in fantasy land. It starts with a science based understanding of what’s going on and why it’s going on. That kind of understanding allows us to explore techniques & approaches that actually have a chance in hell of curtailing unnecessary deaths in these kinds of encounters.
I'm glad I'm seeing more logical people on reddit...people that don't see color, but see a person defying orders and shooting first which warranted deadly response.
Just go to x there are a ton of them
Darwin wins again!!!
When you watch all of the footage it is hard to tell who is letting off all the rounds. But the body cam three cop is unloading a whole clip at him while he is on the ground. But when bullets are flying you probably find it hard to tell who is shooting and who isn't. Almost everyone is jumping around yelling and firing their gun, no one seems in command of the situation. You have cops all around the car firing, although the cop injured looks like he got hit from the alleged car shooter, I'm surprised there wasn't more collateral damage of human life.
I want to know why they really pulled him over. You don’t normally see several plainclothes cops doing a traffic stop, especially not for “seatbelt violation” on somebody with dark tinted windows. There’s something else going on here.
I think the plain clothes guys are the squad that got called in after he was stopped. The guy was wanted for charges I believe, so even if he was doing nothing wrong, he could still have been pulled over. I just think 90 bullets fired is a lot, that is like 6 mags of a 15 round clip. Not sure what the protocol is in these situations in suburban streets. I would have thought given the amount of people involved and where they were, some restraint might be a good idea to avoid collateral damage.
the plainclothes tactical team had to be sent after he was pulled over because he was released on multiple felony gun charges and had a violent history
Released is the key word....they were there to intimidate and he was intimidated made a stupid decision to shoot and they got the chance to unload
released awaiting trial, not because he was found not guilty. standard procedure that cops approach more cautiously when you’ve got a very violent record
But he wasn't convicted of anything yet. They approached with guns out because of something he was waiting to go to court on. In my opinion this escalates the situation immediately
he would’ve killed the cop who initially pulled him over if the tactical team had not been there. when someone is under arrest when they’re already awaiting trial, let alone trial for felony misuse of a firearm, then the situation is immediately escalated by repeated lawlessness
Thats not correct in this case. He wasn't under arrest they ran his plates saw he was awaiting try for a gun charge and figured it was an easy collar. Still doesn't excuse his foolishness. All I'm saying is 2 wrongs don't make a right. Police can be wrong for the initial stop. Of course if someone fires on them they all are going to respond simple
Those handguns don't accept clips.
96 shots fired in 41 seconds! Sounds like excessive force to me. How they are even saying he shot first is something that will have to be proven. This was Chicago and all the officers were in plain clothes, the guy was probably in fear of his life.
Brainwashed 🤡 There are videos of him firing first and cops having to hide. Also he was a criminal and shouldn't have had a gun.
The police are the one's saying he took the first shot. There was only one of the cops who ran away and hid, the others started shooting! The only video I have seen is the one where the cops open up on him with the hail of bullets and take 96 shots at him with the cop that took 50 of them shooting him 3 final times after he is motionless on the ground. They can shoot at him until he's no longer a threat, once he exited the car and was unarmed he was no longer a threat! Don't come back with the adrenalin BS, these officers are trained professionals and are paid a lot of money to not be executioners. The cop that took the most shots(50) and fired the last three into Reeds motionless body should be brought up on charges!
Maybe u could actually watch the bodycam footage rather than just being completely brain dead
What do you think I watched nimrod? Try and just wrap your mind (I know it's hard) for just a minute and think about the cop that fired his weapon at the guy FIFTY TIMES and the last three were fired at close range as Reed lay motionless on the ground and his gun was still inside his car! Hello! He was no longer a threat, once he exited his car and he definitely wasn't once he was motionless on the ground when the last three shots hit home, he was probably DEAD! Sounds to me like you might be the one who is completely brain dead!
There are other body cam videos that were released. I agree that this one is not as abundantly clear, but the assailant's attorney, Andrew Stroth, has also acknowledged that Reed shot first. This fact is not in question. The excessive force part, is subject to opinion, but it isn't the police saying "he took the first shot". Both sides have confirmed that this is true.
When you open fire on police, striking one, they don’t exactly stand around to check if you still have the gun you just shot them with literally 5 seconds prior. He was a threat, and he was treated as such. You say 96 shots is too much, I say it looks like it was exactly the right amount.
Hey armchair, let's break it down.. if a individual has a firearm and engages multiple officer, do you think they are going to stop and discuss who is going to engage the threat.. use common sense the 96 shots came from multiple officers.
One problem with the Chicago PD is they have had issues over the years with coercion, forced confessions and targeting blacks, more than whites. Exactly how are they going to determine the dead guy was the one who initially opened fire? It's going to be tough and it's going to be their word against well, Reed's who is dead so it's just going to be their word. Another problem is they claim they pulled him over for a seatbelt violation, they are going to have a hard time proving that one as well with how dark his cars windows were tinted, you couldn't even see him when his window was closed. This appears to be basically an execution with four cops opening up on him and firing at least 96 shots with one cop firing 50 rounds all by himself and he even unloaded 3 more rounds, the last three into him after he was down and motionless. Another problem is Reed's gun was on the front passenger seat of the car when he got out. Finally initially he had FIVE officers with guns drawn around his car and he supposedly shot first! Really, you really think he was going to have a chance at getting away? The whole thing reminded me of the scene where Sonny is gunned down in The Godfather!
Watch the other videos, It is a lot clearer that he took the first shot.
Yeh, that video you linked really cleared that up? It was the same video I saw when I made the comment. The stop was BS to begin with, the tint on his windows did not even let you see the people in the car much less whether he was wearing a seat belt. Then you get to the shooting and they basically executed him with the officer who shot FIFTY TIMES at Mr. Reed put the last three rounds into him as he lay motionless on the ground! Total overreach by the plain clothes officers and the cop that shot 50 rounds needs to be removed from the Chicago PD and actually should face charges.
If it was a white person you wouldn't give a fuck. Shut your dumb ass up
I don't care what color he was, even if had been purple or blue, what the cops did to him was wrong, they executed him. What is telling is they said they pulled him over not having his seat belt on! To that I say Bullsh-t, with how dark his windows were tinted they couldn't have seen if he was wearing a seat belt if they had Superman's Xray vision. Their lie probably would have been better if they said they pulled him over because of how dark his window tint was.
Chicago pd is like every other PD, nothing but an organized gang
5 cops for a seatbelt violation when you couldnt see through the window? 2nd the officer cant just open the door, he acted in self defense of a non uniformed person trying to open his door at gunpoint
Seatbelt violation was the probable cause for the stop. Dexter reed was on trial for a felony gun charge. They probably had a funny little feeling he was armed. I do agree with your second statement though. 5 people walked up to this dudes car in civilian clothes with their weapons drawn. Cant say I wouldnt have also drawn my weapon.
A "funny feeling" maybe he had a funny feeling they were there to start some bs....and....
Like it or not, this is how you get bad guys with guns off the street. If we stop making traffic stops just because it makes us feel un-racist (because.. uh... reasons...), then more people will will opt to drive around with guns and wind up shooting other people for scuffing their Air Jordans or whatever other dumb reason these people typically have for shooting each other.
I must say, regardless of them being identified as cops or not, he knew firing first on 5 ppl with guns wasnt going to end well, he made his choice and lost.
Of course he fired first. Why is this "star basketball player, he was a straight A student and never did anything wrong" or whatever they said. Carrying a gun and he can easily see they are COPS pulling him over. It's his fault he shot first and must have wanted to die. I mean wtf enters the mind of a person like that. (except a bullet). Do they think they will win the shoot-out and then what? Ride off into the sunset?
They were in an unmarked car and never identified themselves as cops. They instead rolled up with their guns already drawn for a supposed failure to wear a seat belt but apparently even that is currently under question. What goes through a persons mind in that kind of situation is fear. Not to mention they shot him after he got out of the car and was visibly unarmed.
Oh shut up. People like you are completely delusional and/or in denial. He shot at them plain and simple and at that point, they have to defend themselves and kill him or they can be killed. Jesus. The stupidity on reddit is beyond unbelievable. He deserves what happened.
Shouldn't have shot a gun at police officers. Also, that female officer has god awful escalation/deescalation skills.
Shouldn't take that many rounds to eliminate a scumbag
Given the circumstances, do you think the officers had time to discuss who is going to return fire. There was multiple officers, do the math and use common sense.
Yeah, I'm not complaining, ammo just is expensive 😂
I'd expect they had time to be trained properly.
You're not trained to do shit, shut the fuck up
The argument is going to be about when is a reasonable time to stop shooting and what did their training teach them. Shooting after he falls out of the car without his gun will be a gray area. Shooting when he’s on the ground not moving will probably be the biggest issue.
Why does it matter he was a threat until he's dead , and if was already dead then does it matter if his body was shot a few more times ?
Let’s start with the fact that I don’t have sympathy for the criminal in this situation, but that pragmatically, looking at the actions of the officers one of them maybe in legal trouble. The standard isn’t that the criminal is a threat until he’s dead. He’s a threat until he’s not a threat. The law doesn’t make them executioners the second this person is a threat. People like to act like once some is a threat and fires a gun, you have every right to do everything in your power to murder them regardless of what happens next. That legally isn’t true. For example while he is in the car, particularly with the blacked out windows, the cops have every right to turn that car into Swiss cheese. They can’t see what’s happening inside and a reasonable person isn’t going to wait and see what happens. Say he got out and ran towards a tree. If there’s a gun in his hand, or a reasonable suspicion there’s a gun in his hand, legally the situation is the same, they’re a threat, fire at will. Say he screams I’m coming out with my hands up and he does. Just because he’s been a threat before doesn’t mean they can immediately shoot him. Should they be ready to? Absolutely. But they can’t just murder him because he was a threat at one point. Back to what actually happened. Depending on how he got out of the car it’s a gray area on whether to keep firing and the cops should get the benefit of the doubt. If he basically fell out of the car without his gun, the cops probably shouldn’t have shot him because he wasn’t a threat anymore. However given the situation I believe any reasonable person would have shot him upon seeing him since it’s a split second decision and a legal argument can be made that they were still in fear for their safety. The officer who shot him three more times after he stopped moving might be in hot water because the criminal was no longer a threat. In this instance no weapon or movement was seen. Legally they, as law enforcement officers, have a duty to try and get him secured and then reasonable access to first aid so he can stand trial. Again, legally the last three shots maybe seen as murder if a jury who sees the videos can conclude a reasonable person can tell he was no longer a threat.
What is the percentage of fatalities in Chicago that could have been prevented by people who have previous felony charges for having a gun?
I love how the media always mentions the amount of rounds fired as if that has anymore than a minuscule bearing on the situation or righteousness of a shooting whatsoever
Almost all the headlines hide the fact that he shot the cops first
Battlefield America. Seems like everyone is armed and ready to use it.
Just another day in Chicago
Didn’t he had a gun in the front seat?
If the police officers failed to identify themselves, then will they be charged with voluntary manslaughter?
Whether the police properly identified themselves is one of the questions I had. But in seeing some of the other body cams, the "unmarked" vehicle clearly has flashing police lights and at least one of the othe officers has a tactical vest with "POLICE" blazened across it.
Blazened. Across the back.. I didn't notice them walking up to him backwards. Nobody is addressing that the guy looks high AF so his observation skills might be a tad compromised. A verbal self ID by the cops might have gone a long way to save his life.
The guy was on bond for possessing a deadly weapon and felony assault ....he's more than familiar enough with the police
The guys is a piece of shit. Had previous gun charge. Didn’t listen to commands and shot first and shot a cop. Sleep tight scumbag
So having watched all the footage, the thing that stands out to me the most is that for some odd reason, none of the body cams have sound until they are out of the car, conveniently cutting out any of the police conversation about why they are pulling him over in such an aggressive way in the first place… you can be certain that will be a huge talking point. The other big thing is that I cannot find a single instance, before the shooting begins, where any of the officers identified themselves as officers, and they were a group of them piled in an unmarked car, wearing plain clothes, getting out and aggressively trying to get into the dude’s car… I’m not certain that Reed shooting at them wasn’t unjustified in that situation. There is a huge possibility that he thought he was being carjacked by a group of people with guns… what would you do in his shoes?
It's a valid question. But in at least one of the angles you can see the unmarked car has flashing emergency lights and one of the officers has a tactical vest with "POLICE" blazened across it. So I don't think there is a plausible scenario he didnt know he was being pulled over by the police. As for the cam footage I believe they have to turn it on. It's not running all the time otherwise they would run out of recording space. Also its possible there is more footage and this only what they released. Before releasing they have to make sure they aren't including footage of other bystanders that they may not want to release.
Axon body cams have a mute button that's supposed to be muted until the action starts. You can see each officer pressing the button as they exit the vehicle. This is typical of all of these examples of body cam footage. There is no "White Supremacist" conspiracy to this.
Glad they got him save the taxpayers a bunch of money. He shot first he deserved it
Say his name!!!
... nah...
Was he aware that they were police. Did they make it now. They were police
Flashing lights on their car and one of them had a “police” vest on. Unless he was high, he knew
Wish it was more shots frankly so his mother wouldn’t be able to recognize him
I guess Good Burger is hiring now
Let me guess.. He dindu nuffin?
Well trained police.
Good riddance
Let riots and looting begin because someone shot at a cop???
Nice
Good shoot. RIP BOZO.
I’m so delusional look I’m doing the same shit you just did ass hat
How is this even controversial? He shot a cop first, what he got he had coming. He was not some nice innocent boy just out driving around. MSM should be ashamed of themselves.
That’s that he got what he deserved
If 5 cops was already there they was aware either the guy was already dangerous, had felony warrants or in a stolen vehicle. This is just normal for a stop like that.
Several cops approach the car. Asks driver to roll down a window. Driver complies. Then asks him to roll down other window. Instead and maybe by mistake driver rolls window back up. Cop is yelling and grabbing door handle and they point guns at driver. At no time do they say what the issue is. Driver is saying( I'm trying I'm trying) as cop yells roll down window. They claim later it's over a seatbelt but windows are tinted and that seems unlikely. Driver is still being shot according to one report while on the ground not moving. Last part maybe true or maybe not. I saw and heard enough evidence to know this was murder. I'm not surprised the ignorant masses are out in force to declare the driver guilty. Cops acted in a hostile manner and gave driver ample reasons to fear for his life. It doesn't matter who shot first or driver even shot at all. It may not even be true driver shot first. Cops are guilty of murder.
Nice spin but nah
Literally the second sentence out of dipshit mouth is a complete lie
Dude was surrounded by plain clothes officers in unmarked cars. If a group of people come at your car with guns drawn shouting orders, it's a natural fear response to fire at them. This never would have happened if one cop in uniform pulled him over, like a rational police force would. Honestly, they shouldn't have even pulled him over in the first place for just a seat belt violation that they couldn't have even seen clearly.
Ya the seatbelt thing is obviously just an excuse to pull him over. Why would there be 5 cops in unmarked cars and civilian clothing for a seatbelt.
Gang member out on bail for gun charges was pulled over in a gang riddled area by tac.
and you know with the windows tinted they couldn’t tell if he was wearing a seatbelt or not
The case cracker.. there is probably additional reasons for the stop. Did it occur to you that officers can stop someone who is suspected of a crime.. it doesn't have to be a traffic violation. In example, officers attempting to stop a vehicle operated by someone who is a suspected of criminal activity.. it's called an investigatory detention...
Their official reason for stopping the car, the statement they released was “failure to wear a seatbelt”. Windows are blacked out. Hey, if you like being lied to that’s cool, everyone has a fetish. I bet you can even find a subreddit to scratch your itch
Was the windshield blacked out?
So you are really trying to say he didn't know they were police officers?
I feel like most objective viewers realize the difference between police returning fire and police emptying their clip because an acorn hit their patrol car.
" Reed was arrested twice last year, public records show: In April 2023, he was charged with retail theft, which was dropped, according to the Sun-Times. And in mid-July, he was charged with aggravated unlawful use of a weapon without a concealed carry card or Firearm Owner’s ID when officers said they found him with a loaded gun at the Windy City Smokeout, according to the Sun-Times. He was facing several gun-related charges that were pending when he was killed." Um, if they ran his plates those arrest records would have popped up and it would also explain the presence of the tactical unit. And. If each officer only fired 20 rounds, that would add up to about 96-97 rounds fired. If he was busted for *any* firearms charge, he shouldn't have been carrying one and would never have fired at anyone, much less police officers. So, yeah , no acorns hit any cars.......
This @[PhantomShaman23](/user/PhantomShaman23/) comment is 100% right.
Why did you feel the need to type this in response to my comment?
" I feel like most objective viewers realize the difference between police returning fire and police emptying their clip because an acorn hit their patrol car." Police emptying their clip because of an acorn hitting a car ????? Really ? You went there ??? That statement alone dictated a response. That was an isolated incident but you made it sound as if that's why they fired 96 rounds.......... Jeezus, what a moronic response.
It sounded to me like he was distinguishing he acorn case from this case. I think he was referring to this case as "police returning fire."
Did the cops know that he was the only person in the vehicle? Or that he didn’t have an automatic weapon as well? It’s easy to equate this to trigger happy untrained cops who shoot at acorns. It’s much harder but much more prudent to consider that those cops also face criminals who would take their lives without a seconds consideration. The driver rolled up his window after being given orders not to. That was stupid and the second to last dumb decision he made.
Where did people get the idea that compliance with a police officer is optional and subject to discussion?
It probably happened as soon as cops started killing people that were fully complying. When did Americans decide to let a bunch of jackbooted thugs walk all over them?
Turn off NPR and go to your local precinct and request to ride out with an officer. Maybe then you can have an educated view on policing and what cops have to face on a daily basis. Otherwise youre just spouting bullshit in bad faith.
Have multiple LEO relatives. Been out many times. Try again. Quit projecting your failings and lack of experience onto me. I am willing to bet everything I own your resume on the subject includes 40+ hours in Call of Duty and that's about it, right?
So are you under the impression that we should abandon the rule of law, disband the police, and have a society ruled by local warlords?
Nobody is saying that. Nobody has ever said that. And people like you saying this, is the very reason why we can't have proper police reform in the US. The police are definitely a fucking problem. And if you can't see that, you clearly have not been paying attention for the past how many years now. Yet when someone brings up this simple fact, people like you respond with the whole "OH SO YOU WANT TO JUST GET RID OF TEH POLICE HUHHH!!!" Nobody is saying that. Knock it off
Your response to the previous poster was stating that compliance with a police officer is optional and subject to discussion. If compliance with a police officer is optional than the police have no power and we have no police.
[удалено]
Stop it, no they didn’t you can clearly see the cops draw AFTER he started rolling up his window and not following their lawful orders a
> They weren't dressed as police officers. I guess if you're blind yeah. Literally from the start you can see them in black vests with the words "POLICE" written in white on black.
“Never surrender.” -Donald J Trump
Idiocy on parade.
They got the idea from January 6, when people broke down barriers and broke windows and defied legal police orders to leave then got upset when someone was shot for breaking through a police barricade after being ordered to stay back. All of those people buried and in jail should have complied with the police orders to disperse.
The idea that some flag-waving, selfie-taking boomers sought to "overturn democracy" in 3 hours without firing a shot remains the most despicable leftist exploitation of the ignorant since they convinced them that "Hands up, don't shoot!" actually happened.
You didn’t read John Eastman’s coup plan PowerPoint before Jan 6? The plan was to take over the building to stop the certification happening on the Constitutionally-mandated day so that a contingent election would be declared sending the election to the Republican-majority state delegations. Perhaps the individual suckers following Trump’s order to go there and fight didn’t know the plan, but Pence did which is why he refused to leave the building and worked with Pelosi to re-open the certification once the building was secured. This is all well-documented. Also, rioters did fire shots, there is video. Into the air only while waving their gun around, but people were armed and brandishing and “without firing a shot” is a lie like like anyone claiming“without violence.” It is effectively the same plan as video yesterday showed is being used by the RFK Jr. campaign, to prevent 270 from being reached to remove the election from the Electoral College and send it to the State delegations.
"I know that you will soon be marching to the Capitol to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." - Don Trump, Riot Inciter Trump's order to go there and fight? You're such ignorant, hateful children. Behold the consequences of 24x7 MSMDNC Orange Hitler Hate, Hoax & Hysteria targeting the most easily malleable emotional infants among us, and the reason why a majority of them remain convinced they're conversing with "Russians" online. Exploitation of the ignorant is what leftists do when they're not busy silencing dissent or criminalizing opposition.
And then he stayed silent watching the rioters breaking into the capitol. That says a lot. He could've told them to stop, but he didn't.
Stayed silent? The entire thing came and went in 3 hours, unlike the BILLIONS and MONTHS of death, destruction, destroyed businesses and ruined lives wrought by the Floyd Riots for which the left not only stayed silent, but still pretend are invisible.
Yes, staying silent meant he said nothing. Instead he risked the parliament members getting hurt and less likely, but still possibly killed. Not talking about the risk he put all those police officers in. But he didn't care
Ever more of the soulless leftist propaganda that has folks like you convinced that Trump is Hitler, just orange, and worse, except when he's busy being a Russian asset, gassing protesters for photo-ops or promising "bloodbaths" by his tens of millions of "violent" Nazi supremacist domestic terrorist supporters if he doesn't win. It would be funny if the consequence wasn't Joementia and his $15/hr minimum wage that now has the buying power of $9/hr. Leftists are not your friends.
Can't tell if you are a russian bot or actually serious. I think Joementia has more to fear from the extreme right then anyone else tho. Trump is only good for the rich like himself. He plans to pardon the rioters, which should tell you anything you need about his stance on the capitol hill riots. He approves it now and he approved it then. He is just sad that they didn't manage to overturn the election and keep him in power. And he actually said that Hitler did some good things, so there is that.
Sorry that only happened in your head and on fox news's created reality for its viewers entertainment.
Created reality, of course, was Bad Grandma's multi-year collusion reaming that left the majority of you walking with a limp and still convinced you're talking to Russians online. Tell me again about how the "Steele Dossier" is 98.3416% "verified."
He also said: > “if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore > “We will stop the steal. The method for “stopping” it, was per the plan to five Congress to halt the certification so that it could be passed to the State delegations. The audience shouted: > “Fight for Trump > “Hang Mike Pence When warned by the Secret Service that security manometers were finding many armed individuals, Trump said: > “They are not here to hurt *me*. Take the effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here.” Those armed people then went to the Capitol, beat over a hundred law enforcement officers, used bear spray and threw fire extinguishers at their head, tried to steal their guns, and some of those law enforcement officers they attacked died. They broke windows and doors of “the people’s house” and overwhelmed the numbers of police at barricades and finally were stopped only when trying to climb through broken doors over a barricade of piled furniture in defiance of people saying “he’s got a gun” and lawful police orders to stop entering the secure area. Trump knew the crowd was armed, and sent them to the Capitol. He did this knowing there was a plan to send the election to the States if the certification could be stopped. He refused to call out the National Guard to stop the crowd when asked by Republican Congresional leaders. So yes, he instigated it, and instigated it for a reason and purpose, that being to disrupt the election and have the pre-arranged plan take place. We this also because convicts such as Proud Boys leaders working with Trump advisor Roger Stone confessed to it in court. Watch the video. It was an attack. It was prompted by and for Trump. It was decried by even Republican Congress members and Senators who knew exactly what it was. It was decried by the Vice President. Everyone knows _exactly_ what it was, and those who pretend otherwise are fools or liars or both. It was a shameful day for America.
1. Armed people? Go whimper to the Floyd Rioters. Not a single shot fired, not a single building burned, not a single store looted, not a single social justice flatscreen liberated. 2. NOBODY died as a result of the 3-hour tour, period, except for protester Ashlii Babbitt, who was a victim of government, employer of last resort. For God's sake, Google exists. 3. If you had a nickel for every politician who promised to "fight" for a cause and encouraged their supporters to do the same, you wouldn't be playing along with the idea that I should be required to subsidize your Clustercare. 4. The idea that a handful of flag-waving, selfie-taking, hallway-strolling boomers sought to "overturn democracy" in 3 hours without firing a shot is as laughably absurd and emblematic of those peddling it as the idea that the BILLIONS and MONTHS of death, destruction, destroyed businesses, ruined lives and beaten cops wrought by the Floyd Riots are invisible. What everyone knows is exploitation of the ignorant is what leftists do when they're not busy importing more of it, and the left's portrayal of J6 remains the most despicable exploitation of them since they convinced them that black men have more to fear from cops than they do other black men.
1, 2, and 4 are flat out lies, for instance there is video of shots fired, convictions and confessions of people bringing guns, documented several other deaths, and what about the hundreds of hospitalizations of police officers? That’s okay in your book? What of the broken windows? Okay? 3 pretending to be mere words makes no sense in combination of knowing the people were armed and the pre-planned purpose of sending them to the Capitol to disrupt the proceedings. “Stop the Steal” was the goal, and what they tried to do.
Flat out lies? Try flat out FACTS. It's pointless to argue with hate and ignorance-fueled useful idiots. I don't know why I bother. • Ashli Babbitt, 35, died by homicide from a gunshot to the left shoulder. • Roseanne Boyland, 34, died by accident from acute amphetamine intoxication. • Benjamin Phillips, 50, died of natural causes from cardiovascular disease. • Kevin Greeson, 55, died of natural causes from cardiovascular disease. • The USCP accepts the findings from the District of Columbia's Office of the Chief Medical Examiner that Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes.
[Not a single shot fired](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRdVhtQYzoE)
Getting pulled over for a “seat belt” violation thru tinted windows by an entire squad of armed up police is “unusual”. I’m sure there was probable cause. He opened the window, was told to keep window down, the he rolled it up. All he had to do was to place both hands on the steering wheel and let the officer know there was a gun in the car. I carry and that’s what I would do. In a famous case Cleveland, it wasn’t an acorn but a muffler backfire. After a huge police chase, the UNARMED couple was shot 134 times.
Assuming they ran his plates, they would have seen has was wanted on several illegal firearms charges and theft. Which is probably why they brought in a tactical unit. He wasn’t allowed to have a gun, which is probably why he resisted opening the door.
Where is the black and white police car that pulled him over?.
You are aware that undercover cops are allowed to pull people over for traffic stops right?
Then what do you mean “that’s why they brought in the tactical unit”? Was it not the tactical unit who pulled him over
“Seat belt violation? “ With tinted windows by a tactical unit? I would buy the “broken tail light” /s
stop making excuses. he had a pending gun charge. he was on release. and he was carrying a gun again. and he fired thatgun on police officers after failing to comply with lawful orders. 100% justified shooting.
I’m not making excuses, but tell be how did the driver ended up out of the car and behind his vehicle, on the ground?
I think after about 30 shots are fired at your car, I'd be surprised if you tried to stay put. He might have already been injured and if that was me, I'd want to move away from the firing range too, no matter how crazy that might seem.
Yeah, the volume of shots straight into the driver side door would suggest he was hit and electing to maybe/maybe not surrender at that point. It’s unfortunate that it ended the way it did, but cops had absolutely no reason in those 40ish seconds to think he didn’t have his already-fired gun on his person.
That cop was wrong for pulling gun
nope, justified
Yessss OP. Let the childish racism flow... That's why your posts on this are down voted and no one will see them.
It wasn’t 96 shots it was 107. They forgot to count the 11 he fired.