- Joined
- 30 December 2004
- Messages
- 87
Liftshard you wrote
Later after chastizing me you added: "My statement was merely that departmental review of officers' shoots is FUNDAMENTALLY flawed. It has too many holes in it to be worthy of trust."
I believe that I am safe in writing that an inference can be made that you believe that government review of officer involved shootings are corrupt.
Furthermore, at no time have I written anything to degrade you. However, you reply by writing:
"Are you um, developmentally challenged?" and then later you wrote "It sounds to me like you are developmentally challenged."
What if I am. Would you want to use deadly force on me too.
Good day to you.
liftshard said:You watch WAY too much television. Review boards are essentially a rubber-stamp for officers' shoots. EXCEEDINGLY rarely is an officer dismissed for such an incident.
Later after chastizing me you added: "My statement was merely that departmental review of officers' shoots is FUNDAMENTALLY flawed. It has too many holes in it to be worthy of trust."
I believe that I am safe in writing that an inference can be made that you believe that government review of officer involved shootings are corrupt.
Furthermore, at no time have I written anything to degrade you. However, you reply by writing:
"Are you um, developmentally challenged?" and then later you wrote "It sounds to me like you are developmentally challenged."
What if I am. Would you want to use deadly force on me too.
Good day to you.