This has been deemed too sensitive for YouTube ads
Former officer Stephen Mader wins a $175,000 settlement from the Weirton, West Virginia Police Department after being wrongfully terminated for not shooting a distraught and armed (with an unloaded gun) suspect.
Thoughts?
▶️ DTube ▶️ IPFS
Anytime an officer doesn't fire his weapon in a high stress situation he should be praised, not fired...
That is a story I am glad I saw! YouTube is really trying to load up on traditional Television censorship to gain family friendly market share. This is good for them and bad for us!
Good thing hard working people want freedom of information, despite some unpleasant experiences it is worth knowing hardships rather than remaining ignorant. SteemOn!
How does one create a profile pic?? Any help is awesome
Go to your profile and tap the pic
@voidspace at first i didn't know and then I saw something that said you have to turn it into a url, but when i tried that, its still not showing up on my end. i need help too
Upload it somewhere else (e.g. postimage) and the link the url in settings.
hello @davidpakman ?
And what is their reward when they shoot unarmed people?
well it wont be demonetized here!!🤑 💰💰😅
Deserve to be shoot or no we are aginst killing, let the court do its work and let him or her busted
The tyranny of youtube continues. This is what happens when all the leverage falls into abusive hands. Youtube is directing people to make only certain types of content instead of allowing people to communicate how they feel. Davidpakman keep up the great original content!
Thank you so much for helping to keep us viewers informed! It's a shame YouTube has become so restrictive, but so it goes in the ever-race of creative freedom outpacing corporatization. So glad you are ahead of the curve on these new hospitable platforms!
You're assuming our criminal justice system is designed for prevention of crime and rehabilitation of criminals.
In America, our justice system is designed to enforce a social caste system. The New Jim Crow is the mass incarceration system.
Maybe the firing of the first police officer (who should be offered a position at a police academy to initiate a change in policing mentality...) was a move to legally protect the two officers who arrived later and shot the mentally impaired person? For if you grant that not shooting was the right decision in this situation how are you going to justify killing the disruptor?
Disclaimer: I am not a laywer nor do I live in the US, so this is just my personal speculation.