Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why did Keith Scotts family lie about the gun? [View all]alarimer
(17,146 posts)71. I am not okay with it myself.
White men with guns parade unmolested. Black men with guns (or even not with guns) get shot and (often) killed.
This is some kind of fucked up and I can't see how those jack booted police thugs get a pass here. Although they will, legally.
Odd that the only police officers charges are usually not white men, either. Funny that.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
232 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
It's an autocorrect typo which should read "holster". At one point my machine autocorrected every
uppityperson
Sep 2016
#30
An ankle holster is not a gun. He may have a gun somewhere, but a holster is not a gun.
uppityperson
Sep 2016
#32
My post only addressed the believability of having an ankle holster and no gun
Egnever
Sep 2016
#117
Absolutely not seeing he had his hand down and was backing away from the LEO he saw pointing
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#157
Are you purposely forgeting that NC is an open carry state? Or is that just for whites?
brush
Sep 2016
#84
The problem with that scenario is, HE isn't supposed to have a gun. Color didn't matter.
tonyt53
Sep 2016
#91
+1, nor did they know he was rolling a joint vs a cigarette. He was rolling a joint is a bulllshit
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#158
Totality of the circumstances. Right. A black guy sitting in his car waiting to pick up his kid . .
brush
Sep 2016
#114
He pulled up next to a police car and started rolling a joint with a gun visible waiting for his kid
Lee-Lee
Sep 2016
#169
Acordding to the LEO there was no questioning, he saw a gun and attempted to break the window with
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#159
The LEO had no evidence that what Scott had was drugs vs tabacco and in court the LEO would be
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#172
Seeing someone rolling something to smoke and a gun together is enough reasonable suspicion in NC.
Lee-Lee
Sep 2016
#178
This is false on its face, Scott could've been rolling a cigarette... its a reason to maybe question
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#179
An ankle holster is not open carry but concealed carry....requires a permit.
EX500rider
Sep 2016
#118
He was sitting in his car waiting to pick up his kid, not doing anything to anybody
brush
Sep 2016
#122
+1, the copologist are out in force right now and they give the CPD the benefit of the doubt that
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#174
Then how did the LEO see the holster seeing he was sitting in his SUV!? Again, the LEOs account is
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#173
On another call in their cars but just happened to notice what was going on in his car? O-k-a-a-a-y.
brush
Sep 2016
#133
That is exactly the kind of dumb interview that made me look so closely at this
Egnever
Sep 2016
#138
Yes, according to the Chief the LEO got out of his car and looked into Scott's window and now
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#161
So the cops get to be judge, jury, and executioner? And you're cool with that?
NightWatcher
Sep 2016
#3
We know little about this incident but you've already decided that his family lied.
NightWatcher
Sep 2016
#18
If they were lying, it's wrong and could inflame tensions leading to more violence
Democat
Sep 2016
#4
Why did people initially claim Michael Brown had his hands up and was shot in the back?
MadDAsHell
Sep 2016
#5
Yep, and only had to falsely accuse one person of shooting another in the back
MadDAsHell
Sep 2016
#21
Was that video of two white guys saying he had his hands up a fake? (Michael Brown)
Mamajami
Sep 2016
#105
+1, that was the vid for me... the utterance of the two guys who were looking at it
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#166
Scenarios like this have played out several times now, and they've turned BLM into a joke.
Marr
Sep 2016
#7
The rest of America knows blacks get treated different and some people will excuse anything
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#168
They've illuminated racist, BLM isn't the joke ... people who excuse disproportionate killings are
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#167
Innocent until indidcated guilty, there's no photo proof Scott had a gun in his hands
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#209
Of course there is a bleepin way. You are interpreting things through a filter, called your
BootinUp
Sep 2016
#45
Well, this LEO had x ray vision so they can of course see the gun through the window and Scott's leg
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#175
THey never said he smoked put, the LEO saw him rolle a blunt which rolling a cigarette isn't illegal
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#218
You ignore the fact that she may have been yelling "don't do it" at all those cops
uppityperson
Sep 2016
#29
Yes, I did watch and listen. Since all you do is insult people who disagree with you, I'm done with
uppityperson
Sep 2016
#37
Holy shit man you have been informed at least once by me and another time by another
Egnever
Sep 2016
#67
Does anyone know why they were bothering the guy in the first place?
The_Casual_Observer
Sep 2016
#51
I read a narrative...the cops were waiting to enact a warrant....ah found a version..
jmg257
Sep 2016
#52
The LEO said he was rolling a joint in his car which he had NO IDEA what it was then the LEO.....
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#155
I don't know, but I also don't know why it took so long to release the police video
still_one
Sep 2016
#104
First of all the only reason they finally realease it was because of pressure from local
still_one
Sep 2016
#129
Foul on the play. You can't use their own words against them. Tain't fair, McGee! n/t
X_Digger
Sep 2016
#108
When I watched the tape instead of just reading the transcript, it seemed clear
pnwmom
Sep 2016
#147
If everyone rolling a joint who happened to have a gun was executed, the population would
Vinca
Sep 2016
#215
There's STILL no photo evidence of a gun in Scott's hand, the OP and everyone who
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#153
The holster is on his leg, the gun was recovered, it is covered in his DNA and fingerprints
Lee-Lee
Sep 2016
#176
All still no evidence of a gun IN HIS HAND AT THE TIME THEY SHOT HIM. Even when looking at the scene
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#177
Yes there is, there has been many orange wallet shootings... ham Sandwhichs etc
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#182
This is false on its face, she said he had no weapon...there's been no evidence of a GUN IN HIS HAND
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#183
Strawman, there's no photo evidence of a weapon IN HIS HAND. The wife is right and the LEOs
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#187
She doesn't have to to be correct, I have a wallet... I don't have one in my hand at the time I'm
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#190
We agree then, onus still on the LEOs because if it wasn't in his hand he posed no threat... given
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#216
We can certainly agree that IF the gun wasn't in his hand, then he posed them no threat.
FBaggins
Sep 2016
#220
There's no photo evidence of a gun that has been shown, I need DIRECT photo evidence not conjecture
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#221
Why do you think the CPD should not get the benefit of the doubt..i.e. anything specific?
jmg257
Sep 2016
#206
Ad homs are an indicator of a weak position. THERE'S NO PHOTO EVIDENCE OF A GUN IN HIS HAND
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#202
There's no video or photo evidence of him waving anything and the LEO didn't know it was a joint vs
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#223