Watch: CNN Supports Officer, NBC Edits Audio, Juan Williams And Joy Behar Suggest Shooting Somewhere Else

OPINION | This article contains political commentary which reflects the author's opinion.

I don’t know if pigs are actually flying or if the rioting and looting has finally outlived its political purpose to the Democrat politicians and thus their liberal media pets, but CNN just backed the officer involved in the shooting in Columbus. And not just anyone on CNN. Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo, along with various other statements throughout the day, about how the officer was just doing his job.

Watch this clip of Lemon and Cuomo.

I’m honestly surprised that CNN allowed that to be said on their show, much less that Lemon and Cuomo were the ones saying it.

Don Lemon actually said,

“We have to be fair about what happens when police arrive at scenes… And their job is to protect and serve. Every life on that scene. And if they see someone who is in the process of taking a life, what is that decision, what decision do they have to make?”

I’m flabbergasted. What they’re saying is the truth, and it’s what they should have been saying for the last few years instead of vilifying every officer involved in a shooting with a black person. Amazingly, they continued on to discuss the suggestions that clueless people continue to make regarding options other than shooting center mass. Of course people are quick to suggest that the officer should have used a taser instead of a gun. But Lemon semi-coherently explained,

“Tasers, they don’t always connect. So, you’ve got to get two prongs or what have you, and it has to connect to whatever.”

What he’s saying is that tasers don’t always deploy properly. And even if it deploys correctly and both prongs connect as required, there are countless examples of a taser being insufficient to stop an individual, who is then able to continue in their attack. And if an officer knows that someone is about to be stabbed, potentially to death, that officer can’t just hope that the taser deploys properly and effectively stops the attack. They have to use what they know will stop the attack, which is usually multiple shots center mass. Why not just one shot? Why four? Because one shot doesn’t always stop the threat. A person can still stab someone to death after being shot once. And that’s not a risk that a police officer can take when they see others in danger.

Here’s another one: An analyst on CNN again saying that the officer was doing his job and that “we need to start looking at each incident as its own incident.” I completely agree. Every incident is different and each must be analyzed separate from the others. I’m just truly shocked to hear this on CNN.

On the other hand, Juan Willams from Fox News said exactly the kind of clueless thing you’d expect from someone who has no idea what they’re talking about.

— Advertisement —

Oh, uh, um, maybe I’d, I don’t know, shoot, but like, somewhere else?

Where, you idiot? Where would you shoot? In the air so that now there’s a stray bullet falling in some unsuspecting neighborhood? If he had any idea about guns at all, he’d know that you must always account for where your bullet will end up. You don’t just randomly fire into the air where that bullet can end up anywhere. How about off to the side where you’re then shooting directly at a car, a house, a neighbor’s yard, or potentially directly into a passerby? Again, fundamental gun safety rules about muzzle and backstop awareness. Maybe shoot at the ground in close proximity to people who could be injured by ricochetting bullet fragments and debris? That’s almost as stupid as “aim for her arm or her leg instead.” You want them to aim for the significantly smaller and faster moving target that is much easier to miss, and risk hitting anything and anyone who might be in the path of that bullet when it misses? And then they’d have a shot bystander and still have an attacker who hasn’t been stopped.

Joy Behar actually specifically suggested that the officer should have fired a warning shot into the air. Which means that Joy Behar has absolutely no clue what she’s talking about. She has no idea about the basic fundamentals of gun safety and apparently doesn’t even understand gravity.

Behar said,

“Shoot the gun in the air, warning, tase a person, shoot them in the leg, shoot them in the behind. Stop them somehow.”

Honey, the only way to be sure that you “stop them” is to stop them. And in a violent incident that occurs within a matter of seconds, you have less time than that to completely stop them. She also suggested that police officers should be trained to shoot in the leg or the arm. First of all, that happens in the movies, and movies aren’t real, Joy. They’re fake. And you know what you’d need in order to train police officers to shoot a very small and fast-moving target in the heat of a split-second altercation? Funding. You need more funding for more training. So much for “defund the police.”

The Columbus police chief responded to a ridiculous reporter question on this very subject and explained why this is an unreasonable expectation.

I’m willing to wager a guess that this reporter had never fired a gun at even a large stationary target.

NBC is facing backlash for selectively editing video and audio of the body cam footage and the 911 call. They were very careful to include only clips that didn’t show or describe a knife. Almost like they wanted their viewers not to know that important detail when they heard the story.

In contrast, CBS and ABC coverage did not edit out the knife, and even highlighted it specifically, which is honestly as interesting as CNN’s sudden narrative shift.

I’m honestly curious about what has changed. Jacob Blake had a knife and was a violent criminal actively violating a restraining order after digitally raping a woman. And if we’re being honest, this story seems ideal for perpetuating the anti-police and pro-riot narrative that the mainstream media has been instrumental in spreading. Are these news networks being told to do what they can to mitigate the riotous response to this shooting? To downplay rather than incite outrage? Has the narrative outlived its usefulness to the Democrat politicians who have been stoking the flames for their own political purposes? Have they decided it’s in their best interest not to actively encourage and support a biased narrative that leads to nation-wide criminal behavior in predominantly Democrat cities?

Regardless, it’s a no-win situation for the officer. If he shoots to kill in order to protect others, he’s a murderer. If he shoots to wound but misses and a girl is stabbed, he’s incompetent and negligent. If he charges the knife-wielding girl, he’s risking the safety of himself and all others in proximity should he be unable to overpower the individual with the knife. If he stands back and lets the kids fight it out with the knife (as people, including a BLM activist, have legitimately suggested should have been done) and someone gets seriously injured or killed, he’s racist and negligent for not adequately protecting black lives.

At the risk of being torn to shreds for even asking, I’ll leave you with one question: Through this entire situation, why was there no other responsible adult present who could diffuse the situation between a bunch of teenagers before it escalated to a point where someone is welding a knife and the police were required?