Quote Originally Posted by Detroitnerd View Post
I've made an attempt to clarify that in a later post. I do think that, when you mention SWAT-style tactics to Detroiters, they will think of Ayanna's death. That was a SWAT-style raid in which a young girl was killed, which is naturally memorable.



Well, if your desire was for a "more balanced" article, I guess I'm wondering where that "balance" is supposed to come from. Who is going to defend what happened, you know, speak to the press and make the article more "objective" or something. That was your complaint, wasn't it?



Are we veering off into some kind of "human shield" argument here? If so, that's so tasteless I won't address it.



Sure, because the whole conceit of the case was that you have 48 hours to solve a case before the trail goes cold. Nobody wants to end the episode saying, "We lost him." The pressure of being a live storyline is intense, as you've seen plenty of people on "reality television" behave like perfect jackasses. Anyway, if what you say is true, I guess I'd ask why the police stopped tactical raids and why Bing put the kibosh on TV crews. Seems pretty damning when you look at it that way.



Um, yeah, and if cops were to just run into crime scenes, guns blazing, probably fewer cops would be killed. But that's not what police do. At least not in Oakland County or Beverly Hills. Saying that something could save a police officer's life doesn't always make it right.



No, only her blanket was burned by it going off while she was sleeping on the porch. [[Where's all the expensive "night vision" hardware to see there's a kid sleeping out there?) Instead, what killed her was an amped-up "reality star" cop shooting first and thinking later. I'd hate to be that guy...



Just because an article doesn't have quotes to "balance it out" in your opinion doesn't mean the person who wrote it is biased. Sometimes, nobody except nut jobs are there to provide the "balance" you seek, and that's the point I'm trying to make.
Yeah, I would like a balanced article and I don't thnk anyone who happens to disagree with your point of view should be called a nutjob. Where did I say they need to find someone to what happened to Ayanna? They found lawyers to criticize the cops without any context for their comments. Would it be so hard to find lawyers from the police union of a defense attorney to say something like, "Let's not rush to judgement"?

And why are you coming up with all of this hypotheticl stuff to support your argument? You ask if I am "veering into human shield" territory, when at no point did I suggest anything like that. You're talking about throwing flash bangs in the middle of domestic calls and using Desert Eagles. You're saying that someone would actually call Ayanna's death no big deal. None of that stuff happened, or is happeing. And are you actually suggesting that a law enforcement professional is likely to act like a jackass based on what some idiot does on a typical reality show? And just so you know, plenty of 48 Hours cases end without an arrest. Some of them are even televised.

For you to call the officer who fired that shot that killed Ayanna an "ampled up reality star cop" shows a lot about where you are coming from in this whole argument. Do you know this officer? Obviously, you weren't there when the shooting happened, so how do you know. It appears as if you are projecting a lot of your own biases on that officer, me, and this entire thread.