Antwon Rose was very probably the shooter in the drive by shooting
By Dave Freeman
I am reading on the PoliceOne website, that the officer has 8 years of experience as a police officer with other departments.
After the drive by shooting and the stop, two guns were found in the car which fit the description of the vehicle used in the earlier shooting, and that the back window of the vehicle was shot out. (This is known as a clue.)
Additionally, the dead thug [Antwon Rose], who ran as soon as the car was stopped, had an empty magazine – and no it wasn’t Newsweek – in one of his pockets. This young punk was very probably the shooter in the drive by shooting and certainly was an accomplice in the prior incident.
The question for the courts and the East Pittsburgh police department will be, did the officer have enough information to reasonably assume that he was legally justified in shooting the dirt bag at the time he did so.
In any event the mob doesn’t care if this black punk was the shooter in the drive by. They see an opportunity to riot and to vilify a cop. That’s all they care about.
14 comments:
It may still be difficult to clearly demonstrate the shooting was justified. One would think that recent past action would be a clear indicator of the likelihood of similar action (homicidal violence) in the near future, but politics and optics being what they are that is far from a sure thing.
"From all accounts, he was a generous, hard-working and highly promising student." Assistant Superintendent Licia Lentz of the school district said Antwon was "a very bright young man" who took advanced placement classes. "He had this million-dollar smile," she said. "He was gifted and teachers were really trying to mentor him."
So how then can you call this upstanding youth a thug, punk and dirt bag?
Gee. I hadn't read that from the school superintendent. I had no idea. Thank you for enlightening me. My bad. Forget what I wrote.
I can do it easily. He was a murderous thug dirtbag asshole.
And Howie...if you're going to change something I write....as in adding the word "black" to my last sentence, wherein I originally labeled him a "punk" without the color modifier...please have the balls to state that you have done so.
Wow! This thread of comments is a better read than the blog.
Just because he was a good student doesn't mean he wasn't a criminal. I once arrested a medical student for running a chop shop. Educated doesn't necessarily mean smart.
Fellows, when I made that crack about Rose being an upstanding youth, I was just kidding. He does appear to be a thug, punk and dirt bag.
Yes Dave, I did insert the word 'black' into your post. I did it because I thought Rose needed to be identified as a black person because there would have been no demonstrations and calls for justice had he been white.
Dave, Sometimes Howie will change some wording in a contributors column. But when the change has been made, it's no longer the contributors thoughts.
Howie and I have discussed this many times. At the very least permission needs to be asked before a change is made.
He has a good blog that I enjoy reading. He is also a dear friend, but I don't think he is going to change.
Howie, my crack about what the school superintendent wrote about the dead thug was also sarcasm. (Great minds...)
Please understand that this was submitted only as a comment to the earlier article and not intended to stand on it's own. Also please understand that I was pissed to see it edited in that manner and with no indication that it was done.
And finally, thank you for owning it. That goes a long way with me. Please accept my apology for expressing the anger I felt when I read the edited version.
Dave, thanks, but no apology is needed. I thought your comment was good enough to stand on its own. I wish you would contribute some posts to BGB. You have a sharp mind and you should share your views with as many people as possible. If you do contribute some posts, I promise not to change a word.
Trey, where do you get "but when the change has been made, it's no longer the contributors thoughts" with respect to the insertion of the word black. Dave was obviously very angry over the insertion, but it in no way changed his thoughts.
For your information, the editor of a publication can change the wording of a submission without having to obtain the author's permission. It's done all the time. Some news reporters have said they did not recognize their own article when it was published.
It's a mute topic now that you owned up to the change.
By the way I'll be out of town for a week or so. Gonna take a break from social media.
Here's my issue.
A thug is a thug. Whether he is white or black or brown or yellow or red or....I think that covers everybody.
Inserting a racial identifier into my statement makes it a racial issue where none should exist. In today's environment, doing that brands one a racist and nullifies the point being made. It allows race baiters and activists an opportunity to twist or outright dismiss one's argument as coming from a racist. That's all they need.
I think I understand where you were coming from Howie. Those making all the noise over this issue would most likely ignore this incident if the thug were not black. It's an important aspect of the reaction to the incident. But my point is that it is not an important aspect of the incident itself.
The change may have seemed a minor clarification when you made it. My concern is that...to a lot of readers it taints the message.
So should I contribute anything further...and if you should seek to correct or clarify anything I write...please do check with me first. I'd do the same for you.
Dave, you are spot on. I'm sorry if I may have made some readers think you are a racist. Please do submit some posts to BGB with my promise that I will not change or insert a word.
Post a Comment