15 pts · March 14, 2015
could be unintentional, because "obviously he wanted to shoot him". 3/3
commenting shows a problem with the approach of instantly jumping to conclusions. And still, nobody is even acknowledging that it 2/3
But nobody is thinking about it. They see a video and instantly think it was his intention to shoot him. This exact fucking post we're 1/2
How exactly can you deduct that it was intentional from that "evidence", without GUESSING? 2/2
where exactly did I GUESSED something? everyone is saying he did intentionally shoot, because he "shot in one motion". 1/2
I never said, it's fine to accidentally shoot someone. But everyone is screaming "MURDER" in the other post. That's not ok.
*of him in the video.
he was shocked for a moment. Of course, it still could be intentional, but I can't deduct it from the video. 2/2
Still, you're drawing conclusions from a video. You can not see the face of the video. If you look closely, he stops after firing, as if 1/2
You're still assuming that he intentionally shot.
Still, people are interpreting it as intentionally shooting, from a video alone. It's the same thing.
how do you know this? getting your weapon out of your holster and accidentally hitting the trigger? of course this is in one motion
He drew his gun and immediately fired, without stopping. And then stopping. It can be interpreted as an accident.
Also, of course there's the possibility that this was not an accident but a murder. But I can't deduct it from what I see.
Should one not accuse someone of murder because of 4 seconds of a 300x200 video? Possibly, too. That's all I'm saying. 4/4
incident as an accident, after investigation. Should the officer be suspended, if he accidentally shoots someone on duty? Possibly. 3/4
judged this situation as potentially dangerous. Accidentally shooting in such a situation is entirely possible. Authorities judged this 2/?
Why would the cop stop for a second after shooting, though? I don't know why he had his gun out, but I could imagine that he somehow 1/?
accuse someone of murder. Way to go, imgurians. 3/3
and he flinched when the shot fired. Could be interpreted as "accidental", as I see it. But it's easier to jump on the bandwagon and 2/3
Imgur at it again, judging only by a video. As I interpret it, he pulled out his gun (for whatever safety reason, it's the US after all) 1/?
thanks for posting the link. even though the article is a bit populist at times and includes pretentious nonsense, it has a few good points.
What I find even more disturbing is that people go to the bad comment section just to down-vote even more.
Because jumping the bandwagon on one-sidedly presented conflicts is popular on imgur, I suppose. Can't say I'm surprised.
fair point, I supposed they paid after their date was over ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It's also not the finest move to let someone else pay for your coffee without the intention to see them again.
ah man, that sounds boiling hot!
I think that's a spider.
neat
could be unintentional, because "obviously he wanted to shoot him". 3/3
commenting shows a problem with the approach of instantly jumping to conclusions. And still, nobody is even acknowledging that it 2/3
But nobody is thinking about it. They see a video and instantly think it was his intention to shoot him. This exact fucking post we're 1/2
How exactly can you deduct that it was intentional from that "evidence", without GUESSING? 2/2
where exactly did I GUESSED something? everyone is saying he did intentionally shoot, because he "shot in one motion". 1/2
I never said, it's fine to accidentally shoot someone. But everyone is screaming "MURDER" in the other post. That's not ok.
*of him in the video.
he was shocked for a moment. Of course, it still could be intentional, but I can't deduct it from the video. 2/2
Still, you're drawing conclusions from a video. You can not see the face of the video. If you look closely, he stops after firing, as if 1/2
You're still assuming that he intentionally shot.
Still, people are interpreting it as intentionally shooting, from a video alone. It's the same thing.
how do you know this? getting your weapon out of your holster and accidentally hitting the trigger? of course this is in one motion
He drew his gun and immediately fired, without stopping. And then stopping. It can be interpreted as an accident.
Also, of course there's the possibility that this was not an accident but a murder. But I can't deduct it from what I see.
Should one not accuse someone of murder because of 4 seconds of a 300x200 video? Possibly, too. That's all I'm saying. 4/4
incident as an accident, after investigation. Should the officer be suspended, if he accidentally shoots someone on duty? Possibly. 3/4
judged this situation as potentially dangerous. Accidentally shooting in such a situation is entirely possible. Authorities judged this 2/?
Why would the cop stop for a second after shooting, though? I don't know why he had his gun out, but I could imagine that he somehow 1/?
accuse someone of murder. Way to go, imgurians. 3/3
and he flinched when the shot fired. Could be interpreted as "accidental", as I see it. But it's easier to jump on the bandwagon and 2/3
Imgur at it again, judging only by a video. As I interpret it, he pulled out his gun (for whatever safety reason, it's the US after all) 1/?
thanks for posting the link. even though the article is a bit populist at times and includes pretentious nonsense, it has a few good points.
What I find even more disturbing is that people go to the bad comment section just to down-vote even more.
Because jumping the bandwagon on one-sidedly presented conflicts is popular on imgur, I suppose. Can't say I'm surprised.
fair point, I supposed they paid after their date was over ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It's also not the finest move to let someone else pay for your coffee without the intention to see them again.
ah man, that sounds boiling hot!
I think that's a spider.
neat