Conservative
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
view the rest of the comments
When are armed police officers not allowed to use deadly force when necessary?
It should be said that "news" sites like this are a common right-wing grift: sell a story in the headline that that angry reactionaries will click on to get that hit of indignant rage.
If you think about the stories for five seconds, they fall apart; but clickfarms like the one in the link know that conservatives will spread incendiary headlines like this without even a shred of skepticism.
Their business model depends on it, and they're eating very well.
Pretty much all the time. It might be a slap on the wrist or something when they kill someone, but giving the ahead to kill people isnt common.
The key word is when necessary.
Police are always, always, just like any citizen, authorized to use deadly force... When necessary.
When it becomes necessary, it falls into the realm of self-defense.