It's more than an unfortunate tragedy. It's a warning. They targetted
and killed someone innocent in the name of protecting people from a
theoretical threat. And their response is "Sorry. It is an unfortunate
loss." Not even "We need to re-examine our procedures and see what
could have been done to handle the situation better." Just "He acted
suspicious so we shot him in the head. It's not our fault. If you have
a problem with this, shove it."

Who's next?

Some guy with chills who is on his way to the doctor's office trying
to keep warm?

Someone who knows that innocent people have been detained indefinitely
without access to lawyers and has just suddenly realized that he is
wrongly under suspicion?

You?

On 7/24/05, Larry C. Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It unfortunately sounds like there was mutual panic - on both the
> victim's part, cops chasing him. and on the police. They may have
> thought he had a dynamite belt on him, and rather than endanger
> others, decided to shoot.
-- 
"You can't destroy EVERYthing. Where would you sit?" The Tick

Now blogging....
http://www.blivit.org/blog/index.cfm
http://www.blivit.org/mr_urc/index.cfm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble 
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:166101
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to