Group items tagged

If the girl was really threatening her life and possible even the cops or the baby sitter than it was good that the cops Tarazed the girl. it probably saved her and maybe even another life.

Personally, I believe that it was wrong to tase the 8 year old. It could have possibly NOT saved her life. What if she fell and stabbed herself in the process. I do think that it was not, but I don't think that the officer's intention was to hurt her, just save her.

I think the police officer did the right thing because the girl was crazy. And there was really no other way to help the situation. I think that the police officers should maybe have another taser that would be better for children who are crazy!

The parents are just mad because this is most likely reflecting on their parenting. They just need to shut their mouths, don't press charges, and get help for their little girl. I just feel bad for the babysitter for having to go through that and for the police officer because he was just doing what he thought was the right thing to do at that time and who is it for the parents to judge what would best be done when they weren't even there.

Ok, yeah, tasers should not be used on children because kids are just super sensitive to certain things, but honestly, a knife is a knife and although the choice made was difficult, it was very smart. The only other option would be to shoot are tackle her. Tackling can lead to the knife accidently stabbing her and shooting could lead to death. Using a taser as I see it was the best option.

no way a child needs tasered. i mean they do but they dont feel free to taze anyone as long as its in your head but never tazer a little kid..

The police officer felt like he had to in order to save the little girl,the only reason i can think of on why the parents would be suing him is because they are afrais it wil hurt their repetation as a parent.

I don't think it's concerning. The government is there for a reason, and they need power to do their jobs. I tend to sympathize with cops because it only shows the bad police that are in the system, a video of an officer doing something good rarely goes viral.

I sympathize with the cop. He is here to protect us from people that can cause bad things, Michael Brown actually attacked him and the cop did what he had to do to survive. You have to show respect to cops and he didn't do only because he was black or that he wanted to kill someone, he did it becuase the felt threaten for his life

I usually don't see death as an answer to anything unless that person is causing harm to other people. I don't think the officer should have actually killed him but instead used a different method to getting him to do what he wanted him to do.

I think these examples are very concerning. I sympathize with the suspect, Eric Garner, after watching the short 2 minute clip of the incident. The suspect was unarmed, and was only verbally refusing arrest, there is no probable cause for putting the suspect in a choke hold, and very well killing him. The grand jury that decided that officer, Daniel Pantaleo, did the right thing started peaceful protest in the Garner family. This is like the case in Ferguson, Missouri, except these protest do not include, looting, setting businesses on fire, or tear gas.

I think there could have been a better way to control the situation other than a choke hold. It would be understandable if it was for a few seconds to calm Garner down, but the police should have known when to stop. He should have been charged for excessive force.

I strongly sympathize with Eric Garner and his family in this case. Police are stepping over the line in instances like these, and no penalties are given to them. The fact that death is necessary for the resistance of a single unarmed citizen is horrific. Resisting arrest or not resisting arrest, if there is no threat of fatal harm to the police officer, no arrest should ever resort to murder.

I understand that the police thought they had to stop him, but putting him in a choke hold was not the right way. They are going to far with the power they think they have.

i didn't see any reason why the officer put Eric Garner in a choke hold for what he did, the officer was abusing his power, a choke hold was not the right answer.

They are going to far with the power they think they have, a choke hold was not right way to go

yes especially the part when the officer put eric in the choke. the officer thinks he can do whatever he wants just cause hes a cop and had some power of us but he took it to far

There were better methods of restraint to get Eric Garner into handcuffs. A choke hold was definitely not necessary, and the cop was definitely abusing his power. No attempted arrest should end in the death of someone, cop or citizen.

The cop has a right to detain anyone that is breaking the law, but he should not have put him in a choke hold. He has numerous tools capable of detaining someone such as; handcuffs, pepper spray, and a taser.

I don't believe that anyone should have any chances of death when being put in handcuffs, but I also don't know the full story of the incidents of the victims, maybe they weren't cooperating and the cops felt that the only way to control them was the chokehold. I believe that the cops should find another way to hold down their victims when handcuffing

I think that this case is similar to the Ferguson case which could cause more people to start protesting more and even worse then they already are. Things could get really bad if it ever happened again.

I feel that the police should be charged for the murder of the Colorado man being shot and killed because this is exactly why people have police protests. The justice system is failing the system.

The fact that he had a hearing impairment was not something that the cops knew forthright and, not to give them the right for shooting an innocent man, they had reason to believe that he could have been the intruder. He was in a robe and looked to be disheveled and could very well have been a crazy man who broke into a random home. There is also the fact that it was dark and the police had no idea what to expect in the outcome of this incident. I do not believe that the cops are at fault in this incident.

Should the cops be arrested, no why? because for one before the coped entered or saw the man they heard a shot being fire in the house which of course caused them to pull there weapons out. When they go to the door the man peaked out around a hallway which to a cop could look suspicious not only that but after multiple attempts to get him to drop the weapon he still didn't. Which was most likely because of he hard hearing but he made a terrible mistake by then coming out and pointing a flashlight at them with the gun in his hand even though the man wasn't pointing the gun at the police it was still alarming to them and there instinct kicked like hey I got a man with a gun in his hand pointing a flashlight at me like he could kill me and the reacted by shooting him dead. Although steps could have been taken before shooting a shot, there was also multiple cops at the scene and you can't predict what each cop would have done. none the less they shouldn't be arrested for the mistake of the man.

i feel like he should not be charged because a man with a gun came out and he also had a flashlight and most guns have a flashlight attachment and so when the guy pointed the flashlight at them they thought he was aiming at them so they fired shots at him also in the 911 call they should have said something about having a gun or about the grandpa

I agree with cmerksick It was a tragic mistake but I think they shouldn't be punished given the situation and knowledge the officers had.

I think those punishments are completely necessary and he deserves it. There's stories like this all the time but a lot of cops won't admit to not shooting them for self defense.

I think that the teacher should be able to have the gun but very protected from anybody except themselves. The teachers should always should check them everyday so they know if its still there.

In my opinion teachers with guns is a good idea, although I don't want some teachers thinking that gives them a sense of bigger authority.

It is a good idea for them to have guns, it would help with safety.

I don't agree with the right of just teachers being able to carry a gun if someone takes a 4 hour class to know to take the gun out and use it in the right way, someone that is professionally trained should be hired because nobody knows if a teacher is going to be able to take a life of someone else.

In my opinion, teachers having the right to carry a weapon is okay. For protection and safety purposes, I completely agree. I think it would give us a sense of reassurance, knowing that we would have a fighting chance, if a person(s) with a weapon entered the school.

I think that teachers should be allowed to carry a concealed weapon to school, if the case is that the first responders would arrive to the scene too late.

I think that its dangerous that the teachers have guns but in this situation I think its okay. The best thing about this situation is that the students don't know where the guns are and how to access them. Also another reason that the guardian plan is so necessary for this town in Texas is because the response time is so long and I would definatley agree that the teachers should be able to have guns.

I would take the side that I think guns would be an okay idea. I think that before a teacher is handed a gun they should be trained on how to use it. I also think that the guns should be put in a safe, somewhere out of the reach of the children. But on the other hand I believe that their should be an officer in every school, I think this would prevent a lot of violence.

Although it might be risk to have teachers carry guns at school, it could also potentially save lives because they could be the ones to stop a shooting or whatever else may happen in the school. I think that as long as the teachers keep them hidden and everyone is on board, then it should be okay.

I believe that some teachers, who have gun permits and all the legal things, should be able to carry guns. But I think they should be hidden so that students cannot get to them.

After viewing the video and reading the article, I am for the fact that the teachers at this school should be able to have guns because they're in a rural area. It takes the first responder 30 minutes to get to the emergency site. A lot of "bad" can happen in 30 minutes. Although I previously stated I was for the carrying of guns, I also am against because I think that if the teachers are going to be carrying guns, they need to be properly trained. If they're not properly trained, bad things can happen too. So all in all, I am for it if the teachers and school board members receive proper training.

I don't think teachers should have guns, because the gun violence will increase. More kids will think they could start to carry weapons, and most schools already have an officer.

I think teachers should be able to have guns in safes in their class room for safety reasons.

I don't think teachers should have guns because I think gun violence might increase and we already have a cop that has a gun so I don't think it's necessary for all teachers to have them

I think that teachers should be able to have guns. they would be protected and i dont think that them having guns would cause more violence because they would be using it for safety of them and the children at there school so there teaching student to be responsible and how to act it that kind of situation.

I think teachers having guns would be a good idea as long as they keep them put away until needed.

I do not think that teachers should have guns because some teachers get mad easily and we don't know what they would do with them. Also students could be looking through a cabinet and find it and tell other students who might take it and possibly use it against the school.

I think teachers should have guns to protect themselves and others but they should check the gun everyday.

Teachers are teachers and there is other people that should take care of violence and shooting at schools. I wouldn't feel more safe if more people start carrying guns I would feel more threaten. If something should it be more difficult to get a gun in some of the states.

I think that it's a good idea to an extent. There are some teachers who, under the circumstances, probably would be to afraid, or just in shock to act in the situation. Over all though, I think it is a good idea.

Being in a rural town it is easier to approve guns and I beileve is ok, in small towns everybody knoes everybody. Many people "Pass through" small towns where there isnt much authority and public safety in the town but there is in the town miles down the highway. Therefore in rural schools I think it is right to be able to carry guns for the students saftey. In urban areas there is public safety patroling the town on a regular basis, there is police inside schools with guns and weapons to protect studnets and staff. In Urban areas I do not think it should not be allowed for teachers to carry guns inside schools.

I think teachers should be able to carry concealed guns, but I also think they should have background checks to make sure they are good people to have guns. I would feel safer knowing that a good person has a way to protect us.

To Sydney - I agree. I think that it should be an optional thing and if you do carry a gun as a teacher you must take a class/course in order for to be able to permit it in the school building.

I think giving licensed teachers guns in rural areas would be beneficial. It may be simpler to have one or two police officer in the school, but have the teachers have guns would also be okay as long as they were trained with a gun and could handle an intense situation. As some were saying about how students might find the gun, the school would probably have a locked up location for the gun, therefore the students would not be able to access it.

I don't think teachers having guns is a good idea because they aren't trained properly in that area. That's why we have a school cop who should be the first to handle situations like that. I'm sure if something like that happened here there wouldn't be an issue with the amount of time it would take the police to get here.

I agree that teachers should be allowed to have guns, but check on the gun everyday to make sure students don't mess with the gun

I don't think every teacher needs to carry a gun but the district should designates certain teachers to allow them to carry guns. They should also be properly trained and be monitored. In the time it takes police to arrive to a call for a school shooting countless students could already be dead, but with the designated teachers there they could put a stop to the shooter.

bllandon- I agree. I believe that certain courses and classes should be taken in order to be an armed teacher. If i had to trust my life to a teacher in a dire situation like a school shooting, I'd prefer it to be in then hands of a calm under pressure, capable shooter.

I believe that teachers should be allowed to carry concealed weapons but as long as they have some type of professional training. It wouldn't do any use to carry a gun of you can't use it and use it safely. Also the gun should be used as a last resort in an extreme situation. I agree with Emily when she's says some students might try and take it but it should definitely be in a safe place where no one but the teacher would have access to it.

I think it is a good idea. The only concern I have is the teacher viewing him/herself to have more authority over others. The students should not know which teacher carry's a weapon. Though the teacher should have to go through many training courses in order to do so. It's one thing to carry a gun, it's another to kill a person and be in a firefight. Not everyone can handle it.

I Think Teachers should be allowed to Concealed Carry as long as they pass certain requirements, like in the video the administrator says they have to be accurate up to a certain point in order to be able to carry said gun. As well as the do training he mentioned that the teachers have been trained in hostage situations. In my opinion with the correct training and practice it would be a great idea.

I think teachers should not be aloud to carry guns we don't live in a small town in Texas where it would take 30 mins. for people to respond .Plus most school already have a trained officers in their schools we don't need untrained teachers to carry weapons.

In regards to what fwyldes753 said, I believe that teachers shouldn't be able to carry guns because we don't live in a rural area and cops are in a close distance. I wouldn't trust teachers to carry a weapon. We also have a school cop that would respond immediately.

I think schools teachers should be able to have concealed weapons on them as long as they go through a gun safety course and if they are too far away to be able to wait for police.

I think that teachers should be allowed to carry guns, but under very strict circumstances. The gun should be on the teacher at all times (never put in a cabinet or a safe, as kids could more easily find a way to get to it), the teachers should go through gun safety and training (which they apparently do), only teachers with gun permits should be allowed to have them, and they should be completely concealed at all times. Although I think this idea is most likely going to stay in rural schools (they have less students, and are farther away from law enforcement), I could see it traveling into city schools in the future. So yeah, all in all I don't think this is a bad thing at all. It could save a lot of lives in the event of a school shooting.

I think that there intentions are great and in a rural town with not many armed forces around to help it might work. But what if a kid were to get ahold of it? I believe that they'd have to be in a safe where the students don't realize what it is or can't see it. But with that they won't have the whole quick to help plan they are hoping for. It would be faster then the cops getting there though.

I think that if the location of that school is very dangerous then teachers should be able to carry guns but out of sight from students at all times. because if students can see the gun, it would make them too uncomfortable to even learn.

After viewing the video and reading this article, I feel that it is appropriate for staff and board members of a school to carry guns. As for schools located in a area where first responders are able to access the situation more quickly, I don't think it would be as necessary. Although I think school teachers carrying guns is a good idea, I believe that it only makes sense for these teachers to go through the proper training before doing so.

I think that it should be allowed for some teachers in rural areas to carry guns. As long as the guns are kept in a safe place and locked away from the students. I don't think that every teacher needs a gun but because they are in a rural area and it will take longer for police to get they should have someone there who can protect them the moment a situation happens. We have a police officer at our school at all times ready to protect us, why shouldn't they have someone who can protect them. If teachers are allowed to carry guns they should have to go through a class/course before being allowed to have a gun at the school.

I'm not sure about teachers being able to carry guns in school. You have to put into factor how it would be concealed, which teachers have access and or carry it, and things like if the students would think it was okay for them to bring some sort of protection, whatever that may be. I don't think it's a bad idea, I just think people would have to be much more cautious in all senses. The barrier between feeling safe, nervous, or afraid around someone would be different for everyone. Carrying weapons might also deter some of the schools wanted achievements for the future, for example attendance averages.

The fact that he still risked his life for a complete stranger, makes him a hero

That is just absolutely amazing. The police officer definitely has some good karma coming.

Faith in humanity restored

Holy crap, that was super close. The officer did his job like a pro!

That's pretty awesome!

wow thats a good officer,He got the man in time

it was a good thing that the cop just happened to be walking in that area at the right time because if not someone would have lost one of their loved ones but they have th cop to think for saving the mans life.

They should give him a raise or something!

that was cool

I don't think the people of Berkeley, Missouri had a right to protest against the shooting of teenager, Antonio Martin. In the video the teen was armed and aiming at the police officer so the officer did what he had be trained to do. Like the mayor of Berkeley says, "Some people die because the policeman initiated. Some people die because they initiated it. And at this point, our review indicates that the police did not initiate this".

The boy that was killed had a weapon on him, and the video does show him raise his hand at the end, but there's no reason they should start a riot, he was in the wrong.

The rioting over this is ridiculous, before making such actions and accusing the wrong person is very naive and immature I think. These people did not know the truth, they just assumed because of what happened in Ferguson. Ultimatly the officer was defending himself, the boy pulled the gun on him first. This was purely an act of self defense, there is no reason for rioting.

It is always a tragedy when a young person dies especially when it happens like this. I understand that people are mad and have the right to have freedom of speech, but they weren't there and they also have to look at the evidence. A handgun was recovered from the scene. The cop did what was needed and probably feels bad enough that this happened he doesn't need more people to tell him he was wrong. People need to look and listen before they go and riot.

It's unfortunate that this shooting happened so close to Ferguson, if it hadn't I don't think there would have been such a big riot. But I don't see the police officer being at fault since there was a gun. I agree with the article when it says there are no winners going out of this

In an ideal world, Biden wouldn't run so that a more popular progressive candidate could run. Unfortunately, Biden likely will run for re-election at the end of his term, or the DNC will push hard for another milquetoast centrist if he doesn't.

I agree with Brandon. I don't think Biden is the best president out there. From what I saw, many people only voted for him to get Trump out of office. However, from what I read in the article, Biden was confident when he said, "Yes. My plan is to run for reelection. That's my expectation." As the current newly appointed president, it's good that Biden responded confidently even if he doesn't run again. He would have looked weak if he said anything else. Also, why are reporters asking this question so soon? Biden has only been in office for like three months. The press is just trying to hurry up life.

I don't think that he should run again, he should allow another to run who might be able to be more productive or something.

I don't think he will end up running again by the end of his term and I don't think he should either as he has labeled himself as a bridge president I think it's illogical to run again. him winning the presidency creates some momentum for the party and it's pretty obvious that from here some more democratic candidates will come forwards vying to be the top candidate, and I don't think Joe Biden coming to join them would be of any benefit and it would probably stand more as a division within the party. Joe Biden pretty much just stood as anti-Trump in this election for people so when people have the option to choose for another candidate I don't think many would choose Biden.

Depending on how his term ends out should be a deciding factor for reelection.

i think it's too early to think about reelection because even if he wants to run again, he might change his mind about it in a few years.

I believe we should wait to answer this question, cause we don't know what he's going to do in the future.

Biden has made some big mistakes, and has done things I don't approve of...But it's been less than a year, so I will give him a chance to correct his mistakes.

I agree with Jackie, it's too early in Biden's presidency to be asking whether or not he'll run again. I'm sure he'll try to run again, but I'm not sure how successful he'll be. Many people just voted for him because they didn't want Trump in office, so I'm doubtful they'll vote for him when there are other options.

it's too early in Biden's presidency to be asking whether or not he'll run again its been like 3 months that's a question that should be asked around the time of reelection.

I don't Biden should run again because they are better options out there for our president. Many people only voted for Biden because they didn't like how trump was as a person rather than what his policies did.

Personally, I think that Biden will run for president and I think that in 2024 he will lose. Do you think the rock can become president in 2024?

I agree with most of the comments. It´s too early to tell if Biden will run again especially since it's only been a few months. Depending on what he does in the office and the feedback he gets will dictate if he runs again. I do feel that Biden was sort of elected just to get Trump out of the office and I hope that in the next election there's a better option besides just the one main factor was he wasn´t Trump. Either way, I look forward to following the rocks campaign.

I don't agree with this quoted statement because as bad as racism use to be, it has gotten better for sure. There will never be peace between blacks and whites, but there is a certain level of being equal either way.

I don't think that all republicans were against Obama solely because of his race, some people did just disagree with him. However, I do think that some people did take that into play. In the article a close representative said 'He recalled a moment when a powerful Republican said to him, "you know, we don't really think you should be here, but the American people thought otherwise so we're going to have to work with you.""

I disagree with this quote because I don't not believe racism has gotten worse since a time period like 1960. The problem is that the media has gotten so corrupt it makes it seem that way.

I believe it has worsened since he has been in office. With a black president it kind of gives them a better chance to protest. I believe once Donald Trump is president they would have less a chance and less riots.

I think that the tension between blacks and whites haven't got any better since Obama entered office, but the relations between blacks and whites now are better than they have ever been in America.

This is not right first off 1 shoot was enough,and he was in need of help.He wasn't looking for any trouble

This is absolutely outrageous! I believe that police officers are over armed and they need to be trained correctly. I don't feel bad for the police officer at all, he had no reason to shoot an innocent man. And to think, the football player was transferring from him school in Florida to a school In Charlotte so that he could be with his fiancee. It's just cruel and terrible what our society has come to.

Whats wrong with that.

I think that's awful and definitely shouldn't be against the law. Providing the homeless with a meal doesn't necessarily keep them on the street, rather them starving and not having any energy to even try to turn their lives around is.

Instead of it be against the law, they should be encouraging more people to feed them. If we just let them sit there and starve they will die, I would rather have homeless people living, then a bunch of dead bodies laying around the city. Maybe all they need to get the motivation to get up and get a job, is by other people showing that care about them, and want them to live a healthy a life.

I think this is absolutely ridiculous. How could the government of Fort Lauderdale be so ignorant and selfish? Granted, some people are homeless because they've made bad decisions to get to that point but some are homeless because they honestly can't help it. Who knows? But I think it should be okay for people to feed the homeless. It should be comforting knowing that people have caring hearts and are willing to give the less-unfortunate people food. I hope the banning of giving food to the homeless never becomes illegal in the state of Iowa because I have given homeless people food countless of times and I will not stop.

I don't think it should be against the law, its just help. Just because someone fed one person doesn't mean everyones going to go and be homeless.

Reading this story upsets me because no one should be charged for feeding the homeless. That is the same as arresting and charging a man/woman for donating to charity. I do believe that some people are homeless because they got themselves there from their life decisions and choices, however others have no other way out. For example, a veteran could be very ill after coming back home and maybe having PTSD and feel helpless and lost. They do not know where to go or who to ask for help. Helping the homeless lets them know that someone cares and wants to help, and I feel this act of kindness might just be the motivation they need to get themselves together and fix their life. This helps them know they are not alone. Florida is ridiculous for charging that man. Instead of it being a bad thing, let us encourage it.

People should be able to help whoever they please. I think the man shouldn't get in trouble because he is helping them by giving them meals. This could also help them save money and eventually buy/ rent a house in the future.

Every town has some sort of poverty and not feeding the homeless isn't going to get rid of them.

Feeding the homeless should not be a crime. It is helping someone in need which is what citizens of a community should be doing is helping people in need and getting the back on there feet.

I don't believe that Abott should be arrested just because he was doing a good deed. I understand the views of the policeman and how they're just doing their job but it's not fair to Abott that he was just trying to be a good person. There is no reason why he should be arrested and think it's crazy that people are getting upset for helping the homeless. They should just leave him alone because it doesn't affect their lives in a big way.

I do think that feeding them food -may- keep them in that cycle. MAY. I highly doubt it does though, because those homeless people probably have nowhere else to go at this point. And how are they suppose to "break" the cycle if they have nowhere to go? No job? If Florida isn't letting these people feed homeless people, then how about THEY do something about it rather than just giving everyone fines and acting without thinking.

I think the city had made this a law in order to give the homeless an incentive to get a job. Which I personally believe is a terrible idea. No one likes living homeless, everyone needs a helping hand sometimes. I would think the officers of the city would have enough morals and ethics to not enforce this law. To be ignored and simply done away with in a few months. It's a sad day when helping becomes illegal.

i don't get why feeding the homeless is against the law, whats wrong with it? your helping a person maybe even saving their life.

I think the law against public food sharing is ridiculous. These kind of rules don't encourage the homeless to start getting back on their feet. Yes, they rely on the food given to them but all the law is doing is pushing the homeless out of Fort Lauderdale, to other areas. Rather then enforcing this new law they should come up with program that provide the homeless with job training and experience so they can really start off productively on their own.

To put it lightly the banning of public food sharing is a stupid, stupid law. Credit, however, to Seiler for saying, "Providing them with a meal and keeping them in that cycle on the street is not productive." He made a valid point, yes, but a homeless person is just the same as a person who owns four houses, they just don't have as much luxury. I think homeless shelters, or even what Arnold Abbot does, feeding the people in need on a beach, that's their luxury. How are you going to take away something like that, for most, it might keep them hopeful. It shouldn't be up to the law who we as people want to help.

this is a joke, how can you not feed another human being??

To me this is not just and feeding the homeless isn't against the law. My assumption is that the cop had hard feelings against the homeless guy and was enforcing illegally.

I don't think that this should be an actual law, what's the harm in feeding the poorest of the poor people? Cops are cracking down way too hard on the wrong "laws". There are criminals out there killing people, dealing drugs, stealing, and we're giving them jail time with possible probation, but feeding a homeless man is a serious crime? Think again.

I think this is ridiculous. We give our police too much power. Feeding the homeless is not a crime and it never should be. We have soup kitchens and things for them. How is it any different? The cops are pretty much taking away our rights and telling us not to be nice? Totally wrong.

I think Abbott has a right to feed the homeless. They don't have anything so we don't just want them to die in the street for starvation that's inhumane. They're just homeless people that are trying to eat the police should have their attention on things that are more important crimes. Besides feeding homeless people isn't a crime.

This sound unbelievable to me and I hope it does it to many other people too. We have to find sympathy to those people and don't think they are some other kind of thing, They are also humans with feelings.

I don't understand what is so wrong with feeding the homeless. I'd do the same exact thing if I could. Police officers are suppose to protect and that means everyone, even the homeless. If a police officer became homeless, losing his job, house, family, etc. I'm sure his friends and past co-workers would feed him too. So what makes him any different than the "random homeless guy on the street." ? I don't think Abbott should get charged.

his sound unbelievable to me and I hope it does it to many other people too. We have to find sympathy to those people and don't think they are some other kind of thing, They are also humans with feelings.

I don't see what is wrong with feeding the homeless. These people are at the lowest point in their lives and need all the help they can get and they fact that the city just want's to look the other way while these people suffer and hope that they go away is heartbreaking. People should help the homeless, help them get back on track and get their lives in order not treat them like a rat. There are actually criminals that get to go free and an old man who was helping the homeless gets put in jail? That's ridiculous.

McConnell is an utter ghoul. Trump, even in the long tradition of criminal presidents, is in a whole 'nother league, and absolutely should be tried for his many, many crimes. The idea that just because he's out of office shouldn't be a factor. That would be like saying a hitman shouldn't be tried for murder just because they quit.

impeaching trump is only going to hurt the Biden admin, the first 100 days are they most important but now with the senate trial people are going to be more focused on that then the thing Biden is doing

If you label Trump as a criminal then you would have to label every other politician as one as well. The fact that he's not in office not only makes him a civilian but trying him at the federal level, just to block him from running again in 2024 is pointless and a waste of congressional time. As well as the American government needs to put the focus on other things than an ex-politician, let's start worrying about getting money to the American people and getting vaccines out.

If the Senate does not vote to impeach Donald Trump it will prove that a President has the power to do whatever he wants as long as his/her party is in the majority. Also, I know that if President Biden was to do the same thing and literally incite a riot on the Capitol then house republicans and republican voters would be calling for impeachment. No matter what party you are, doing what Former President Trump did is disgusting and justice has to be served.

Just like the last impeachment, this one is a waste of time. We need to focus on the US and not Impeaching Trump. Given the current situation, we do not have the time to impeach Trump. If we impeach him it's going to be another 3 months of wasted time just like the last impeachment.

I feel like people tend to judge Trump on how he acts rather than what he has done. Yeah he acts childish but if he's done good things why cant he be credited for it.

there is no reason to take action like that it wasn't necessary to shoot him

Don't think it was necessary to shoot him.

he did nothing wrong , he didnt deserve to be shot and the cop should be charged

This video just looks a little weird to me... Anyway this was not a right way to go about this situation. Shooting someone 4 times is ridiculous.

I would have shot him to

I don't think it was right to shoot him. The police could have talked him out of what he was doing and could have figured out a better way to arrest him.

Wow, this make s me wonder how many times a day police officers abuse their power for wrong reasons and actually get away with it. It's ridiculous how they think they are above the law when they are only suppose to be enforcing the law.

Another case of the police taking advantage of their power

Well Valeria is right, it's yet another case in which the police abuse their power.

A example of some one who is abusing there power

A example of the government abusing there power

This is an example of an abusive of power. I also think that the police office thought he could get away with his actions and get away with the lie because of his title as a police officer.