>>177
I'm not saying it doesn't happen but I would not go around criticising others on ignoring parts of their post when you have ignored most of mine.

>First off I wasn't talking about just one case.

It's the risk of operating in the areas that they do. And again, you forget that the officers responsible get punished, even your own links say that. Did you just ignore that part of your own link or something?

>Finally, do you think they would have been let go so easily if there wasn't backlash.

Yes, it's the media so of course they would be.

>That woman was calmly of her property and there wasn't a riot going on on that street, yet they fired on her. It's not magic to see that someone just chilling on a porch on a quiet street isn't a rioter.

Is it? Is it really? Because a rioter would never invade the property of an individual or organisation now would they? Honestly, it sucks for her but if there is a riot going on and people are shooting rubber bullets and using tear gas then maybe it would be best to stay inside.

>No but arresting someone when they aren't doing or had done something illegal is. There's also the matter of assaulting and killing citizens when they pose no danger.