Sorry,i dont get..

Thirty Bills Unpaid

rgambs said:

Last-12-Exit said:

dimitrispearljam said:

if police is only for shoot to kill,u dont need them..maybe marines need to patrol the cities..so shoot everything moves and put snipers to every roof

That's just silly.

it isnt. silly is doggedly backing cops just cuz they are cops. they act like soldiers shooting to kill...the rest of the world looks at america like a bunch of savages and i can see why.
all across the world knife weilding maniacs are dealt with SAFELY by cops who dont even carry guns. why not here? why is deadly force so permissable..

btw thirty bills you answered my question deftly and without evasion in the MB tread...not

You don't know how to use the quote feature and you made your words look like my words.

I asked you to clean that up and then ask me your question. If you are unable to do so, or unwilling, then state such and ask me your question again without fucking anything up as you do.

rgambs

Last-12-Exit said:

It's not up to us to decide when it is or is not necessary to use their weapon. We are not the ones out there facing these situations. How easy is it to sit at our computers watching these videos and when we weren't facing that guy. Unless you were a cop, how can you say that it was unnecessary to use a gun. Most of us have never really faced a life threatening situation in our lives. Yet we want to tell the people who face them on a daily basis how to handle it.

so, what? They get a free pass? Only cops can decide on police brutality? Thats hardly a democratic system. Police are well known to protect their own, what is to stop them from abusing power if not the citizens who pay the taxes that fund their careers?
Are we just supposed to keep quiet out of some idiotic deference to authority?

rgambs

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Last-12-Exit said:

dimitrispearljam said:

if police is only for shoot to kill,u dont need them..maybe marines need to patrol the cities..so shoot everything moves and put snipers to every roof

That's just silly.

it isnt. silly is doggedly backing cops just cuz they are cops. they act like soldiers shooting to kill...the rest of the world looks at america like a bunch of savages and i can see why.
all across the world knife weilding maniacs are dealt with SAFELY by cops who dont even carry guns. why not here? why is deadly force so permissable..

btw thirty bills you answered my question deftly and without evasion in the MB tread...not

You don't know how to use the quote feature and you made your words look like my words.

I asked you to clean that up and then ask me your question. If you are unable to do so, or unwilling, then state such and ask me your question again without fucking anything up as you do.

i quoted you the second time and you evaded the question a second time. Now you have responded a third time without answering the question again and i am wondering why am i bothering with this? If you wanted to answer you wouldnt be dithering about my phone screwing up the quote slightly.

wall232

It may not seem necessary to you, but to them a man ignoring their orders to stop and place a knife down was a serious threat. It's not like the man was down the block, he was within a few feet of one of these officers and still walking towards them. You could say use a tazer or pepper spray, but it's been proven that they always don't work. These officers have every right to be able to go home after work like the rest of us, and if a man is blatantly ignoring an order and still approaching I believe they had every right to shoot.

Idris

wall232 said:

It may not seem necessary to you, but to them a man ignoring their orders to stop and place a knife down was a serious threat. It's not like the man was down the block, he was within a few feet of one of these officers and still walking towards them. You could say use a tazer or pepper spray, but it's been proven that they always don't work. These officers have every right to be able to go home after work like the rest of us, and if a man is blatantly ignoring an order and still approaching I believe they had every right to shoot.

Yes Yes, I agree.

But let's not confuse someones 'right' to do something (in this case the officers), with the 'need' to do THAT something, Was killing him really necessarily needed? I personally, from my heart, and experience don't think it was (needed/necessary)

Better training, and better non lethal tools is a good (sort of) solution to many of these situations, surely!

PJ_Soul

Last-12-Exit said:

I don't disagree with using non lethal weapons for certain incidents. But considering the circumstances in Ferguson and the surrounding areas right now, the gun may be the first option just because everyone is on edge. I understand the double edge sword that creates. But the drastic situations cause for drastic measures. It's not perfect, but it may be the only way right now. What this comes down to, wheather you agree or not, listen to the cops. If they say put it down, you probably better listen.

When everyone is on edge it's the BEST time to be thinking about using non-lethal weapons as the first option, not the other way around. I' say that now is the time when another cop is MOST likely to unnecessarily use deadly force.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Last-12-Exit said:

dimitrispearljam said:

if police is only for shoot to kill,u dont need them..maybe marines need to patrol the cities..so shoot everything moves and put snipers to every roof

That's just silly.

it isnt. silly is doggedly backing cops just cuz they are cops. they act like soldiers shooting to kill...the rest of the world looks at america like a bunch of savages and i can see why.
all across the world knife weilding maniacs are dealt with SAFELY by cops who dont even carry guns. why not here? why is deadly force so permissable..

btw thirty bills you answered my question deftly and without evasion in the MB tread...not

You don't know how to use the quote feature and you made your words look like my words.

I asked you to clean that up and then ask me your question. If you are unable to do so, or unwilling, then state such and ask me your question again without fucking anything up as you do.

i quoted you the second time and you evaded the question a second time. Now you have responded a third time without answering the question again and i am wondering why am i bothering with this? If you wanted to answer you wouldnt be dithering about my phone screwing up the quote slightly.

So ask the fucking question of me again. What do you want me to do... go back 7 pages and find it?

And classic... just like you don't want morons that come at cops with knives to be held accountable for their actions... you don't want to assume responsibility for screwing up the quotations (blaming it on the phone).

Notice a pattern here?

PJ_Soul

Last-12-Exit said:

It's not up to us to decide when it is or is not necessary to use their weapon. We are not the ones out there facing these situations. How easy is it to sit at our computers watching these videos and when we weren't facing that guy. Unless you were a cop, how can you say that it was unnecessary to use a gun. Most of us have never really faced a life threatening situation in our lives. Yet we want to tell the people who face them on a daily basis how to handle it.

So we should just leave everything up to cops and let them make their own decisions without questioning them? Doesn't that seem a little irresponsible and dangerous to you?

PJ_Soul

rgambs said:

wall232 said:

rgambs said:

Last-12-Exit said:

dimitrispearljam said:

if police is only for shoot to kill,u dont need them..maybe marines need to patrol the cities..so shoot everything moves and put snipers to every roof

That's just silly.

it isnt. silly is doggedly backing cops just cuz they are cops. they act like soldiers shooting to kill...the rest of the world looks at america like a bunch of savages and i can see why.
all across the world knife weilding maniacs are dealt with SAFELY by cops who dont even carry guns. why not here? why is deadly force so permissable..

btw thirty bills you answered my question deftly and without evasion in the MB tread...not

What's silly is always bashing cops just because they're cops. I’ve seen this too many times on this board and I just don’t get it. Yes there are bad cops out there, but there are so many good cops out doing good things every day. You don’t hear about these events because it’s not newsworthy..

cops get bashed on this board when they gun people down in the streets...thats a far cry from bashing them for putting on the uniform. I suppose we should be good little subjects and allow the use of deadly force without trying to understand why?
Forget that!

Apparently so! We should never question authority! Everything will be okay if we just shut up and let the people with power do whatever they want, duh.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

PJ_Soul said:

Last-12-Exit said:

It's not up to us to decide when it is or is not necessary to use their weapon. We are not the ones out there facing these situations. How easy is it to sit at our computers watching these videos and when we weren't facing that guy. Unless you were a cop, how can you say that it was unnecessary to use a gun. Most of us have never really faced a life threatening situation in our lives. Yet we want to tell the people who face them on a daily basis how to handle it.

So we should just leave everything up to cops and let them make their own decisions without questioning them? Doesn't that seem a little irresponsible and dangerous to you?

What you say here isn't congruent.

We have to let them make decisions in the line of fire; however, after the fact, we can review their performance to determine if they were malicious or not.

I don't read where he said we have to live with every decision cops make. I read that it is a hell of a lot tougher to play cop wearing the shoes and on the street than it is from behind your laptop screen.

dimitrispearljam

my sister is a cop..he husband as well..so lets say,im more easy to take their side than be against them
this was an exucation.,.again,at greece they will be in jail facing 1st degree murder..
empty your gun like this isnt protect and serve,...is murder..

Last-12-Exit

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJ_Soul said:

Last-12-Exit said:

It's not up to us to decide when it is or is not necessary to use their weapon. We are not the ones out there facing these situations. How easy is it to sit at our computers watching these videos and when we weren't facing that guy. Unless you were a cop, how can you say that it was unnecessary to use a gun. Most of us have never really faced a life threatening situation in our lives. Yet we want to tell the people who face them on a daily basis how to handle it.

So we should just leave everything up to cops and let them make their own decisions without questioning them? Doesn't that seem a little irresponsible and dangerous to you?

What you say here isn't congruent.

We have to let them make decisions in the line of fire; however, after the fact, we can review their performance to determine if they were malicious or not.

I don't read where he said we have to live with every decision cops make. I read that it is a hell of a lot tougher to play cop wearing the shoes and on the street than it is from behind your laptop screen.

No, we do not get to review their performances. Their bosses do that. And if something illegal occurs, then internal affairs get involved. Either way, the public does not have a say in the matter.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Last-12-Exit said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJ_Soul said:

Last-12-Exit said:

It's not up to us to decide when it is or is not necessary to use their weapon. We are not the ones out there facing these situations. How easy is it to sit at our computers watching these videos and when we weren't facing that guy. Unless you were a cop, how can you say that it was unnecessary to use a gun. Most of us have never really faced a life threatening situation in our lives. Yet we want to tell the people who face them on a daily basis how to handle it.

So we should just leave everything up to cops and let them make their own decisions without questioning them? Doesn't that seem a little irresponsible and dangerous to you?

What you say here isn't congruent.

We have to let them make decisions in the line of fire; however, after the fact, we can review their performance to determine if they were malicious or not.

I don't read where he said we have to live with every decision cops make. I read that it is a hell of a lot tougher to play cop wearing the shoes and on the street than it is from behind your laptop screen.

No, we do not get to review their performances. Their bosses do that. And if something illegal occurs, then internal affairs get involved. Either way, the public does not have a say in the matter.

Agents of the public.

But for the record, I believe independent agencies should review cases such as these.

dimitrispearljam

Last-12-Exit said:

Wow dimi. You just compared 2 police officers who were protecting themselves to an Islamic radical group kidnapping and sawing the head off a journalist.

i just compare a murderer that crazy fucker cut the head,wiuth 2 officers that instead of do the best ,the normal thing ,to unarm a guy on the street,they kill him cos they didnt care or respect of his life and cos they know they will just give a statement to internal affers and will let go
so yes,,someone dont respect human life and take it so easily,cos has the power to do it,or has a knife and a head infront of them to cut for me are the same..both murderers

Thirty Bills Unpaid

dimitrispearljam said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Wow dimi. You just compared 2 police officers who were protecting themselves to an Islamic radical group kidnapping and sawing the head off a journalist.

i just compare a murderer that crazy fucker cut the head,wiuth 2 officers that instead of do the best ,the normal thing ,to unarm a guy on the street,they kill him cos they didnt care or respect of his life and cos they know they will just give a statement to internal affers and will let go
so yes,,someone dont respect human life and take it so easily,cos has the power to do it,or has a knife and a head infront of them to cut for me are the same..both murderers

Except one victim was confronting and challenging their slayer with a knife. The other victim believed in something different than their slayer.

There's a big difference between these two examples.

dimitrispearljam

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

dimitrispearljam said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Wow dimi. You just compared 2 police officers who were protecting themselves to an Islamic radical group kidnapping and sawing the head off a journalist.

i just compare a murderer that crazy fucker cut the head,wiuth 2 officers that instead of do the best ,the normal thing ,to unarm a guy on the street,they kill him cos they didnt care or respect of his life and cos they know they will just give a statement to internal affers and will let go
so yes,,someone dont respect human life and take it so easily,cos has the power to do it,or has a knife and a head infront of them to cut for me are the same..both murderers

Except one victim was confronting and challenging their slayer with a knife. The other victim believed in something different than their slayer.

There's a big difference between these two examples.

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

dimitrispearljam said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Wow dimi. You just compared 2 police officers who were protecting themselves to an Islamic radical group kidnapping and sawing the head off a journalist.

i just compare a murderer that crazy fucker cut the head,wiuth 2 officers that instead of do the best ,the normal thing ,to unarm a guy on the street,they kill him cos they didnt care or respect of his life and cos they know they will just give a statement to internal affers and will let go
so yes,,someone dont respect human life and take it so easily,cos has the power to do it,or has a knife and a head infront of them to cut for me are the same..both murderers

Except one victim was confronting and challenging their slayer with a knife. The other victim believed in something different than their slayer.

There's a big difference between these two examples.

i agree..but im talking about the murderers,not the victims

rgambs

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Last-12-Exit said:

dimitrispearljam said:

if police is only for shoot to kill,u dont need them..maybe marines need to patrol the cities..so shoot everything moves and put snipers to every roof

That's just silly.

it isnt. silly is doggedly backing cops just cuz they are cops. they act like soldiers shooting to kill...the rest of the world looks at america like a bunch of savages and i can see why.
all across the world knife weilding maniacs are dealt with SAFELY by cops who dont even carry guns. why not here? why is deadly force so permissable..

btw thirty bills you answered my question deftly and without evasion in the MB tread...not

You don't know how to use the quote feature and you made your words look like my words.

I asked you to clean that up and then ask me your question. If you are unable to do so, or unwilling, then state such and ask me your question again without fucking anything up as you do.

i quoted you the second time and you evaded the question a second time. Now you have responded a third time without answering the question again and i am wondering why am i bothering with this? If you wanted to answer you wouldnt be dithering about my phone screwing up the quote slightly.

So ask the fucking question of me again. What do you want me to do... go back 7 pages and find it?

And classic... just like you don't want morons that come at cops with knives to be held accountable for their actions... you don't want to assume responsibility for screwing up the quotations (blaming it on the phone).

Notice a pattern here?

i asked twice, thats enough for me, the question is irrelevant now...your tactics are still relevant though. To answer your question at the end (rhetorical or not)
i am noticing a pattern here: evasion followed by beligerance. Happily, im not offended that you made a broad, assumptive attack on the way i live my life becuase you bungled it pretty handily. I havnt addressed the accountability of the knife weilder or michael brown so you are pulling that from somewhere dark, wet, and stinky.
I absolutely hold them accountable for their parts in their deaths. If they had behaved properly they would still be alive. However, like in a classroom, i hold the teacher (cop) to a higher standard of behavior than student (suspect) as the position of authority is the position which requires discretion.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Last-12-Exit said:

dimitrispearljam said:

if police is only for shoot to kill,u dont need them..maybe marines need to patrol the cities..so shoot everything moves and put snipers to every roof

That's just silly.

it isnt. silly is doggedly backing cops just cuz they are cops. they act like soldiers shooting to kill...the rest of the world looks at america like a bunch of savages and i can see why.
all across the world knife weilding maniacs are dealt with SAFELY by cops who dont even carry guns. why not here? why is deadly force so permissable..

btw thirty bills you answered my question deftly and without evasion in the MB tread...not

You don't know how to use the quote feature and you made your words look like my words.

I asked you to clean that up and then ask me your question. If you are unable to do so, or unwilling, then state such and ask me your question again without fucking anything up as you do.

i quoted you the second time and you evaded the question a second time. Now you have responded a third time without answering the question again and i am wondering why am i bothering with this? If you wanted to answer you wouldnt be dithering about my phone screwing up the quote slightly.

So ask the fucking question of me again. What do you want me to do... go back 7 pages and find it?

And classic... just like you don't want morons that come at cops with knives to be held accountable for their actions... you don't want to assume responsibility for screwing up the quotations (blaming it on the phone).

Notice a pattern here?

i asked twice, thats enough for me, the question is irrelevant now...your tactics are still relevant though. To answer your question at the end (rhetorical or not)
i am noticing a pattern here: evasion followed by beligerance. Happily, im not offended that you made a broad, assumptive attack on the way i live my life becuase you bungled it pretty handily. I havnt addressed the accountability of the knife weilder or michael brown so you are pulling that from somewhere dark, wet, and stinky.
I absolutely hold them accountable for their parts in their deaths. If they had behaved properly they would still be alive. However, like in a classroom, i hold the teacher (cop) to a higher standard of behavior than student (suspect) as the position of authority is the position which requires discretion.

You are weird, man. Seriously.

Whatever the question was that you thought was really special... let's just say you completely stumped me on it and you win.

So go scurry away and place that somewhere, as you put it to me, dark, wet, and stinky.

PJ_Soul

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJ_Soul said:

Last-12-Exit said:

It's not up to us to decide when it is or is not necessary to use their weapon. We are not the ones out there facing these situations. How easy is it to sit at our computers watching these videos and when we weren't facing that guy. Unless you were a cop, how can you say that it was unnecessary to use a gun. Most of us have never really faced a life threatening situation in our lives. Yet we want to tell the people who face them on a daily basis how to handle it.

So we should just leave everything up to cops and let them make their own decisions without questioning them? Doesn't that seem a little irresponsible and dangerous to you?

What you say here isn't congruent.

We have to let them make decisions in the line of fire; however, after the fact, we can review their performance to determine if they were malicious or not.

I don't read where he said we have to live with every decision cops make. I read that it is a hell of a lot tougher to play cop wearing the shoes and on the street than it is from behind your laptop screen.

But that's what we do now. We let them make decisions and then call them out when it seems their decisions were terrible. But you asked how anyone who isn't a cop can possibly judge their actions... We can (i.e. watch dogs, etc). That's my point. We, the public or its representatives, have to be the ones who judge whether or not their actions are okay or not. If we don't, then who should? Other cops?? I don't think THAT'S such a good idea.

dignin

PJ_Soul said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJ_Soul said:

Last-12-Exit said:

It's not up to us to decide when it is or is not necessary to use their weapon. We are not the ones out there facing these situations. How easy is it to sit at our computers watching these videos and when we weren't facing that guy. Unless you were a cop, how can you say that it was unnecessary to use a gun. Most of us have never really faced a life threatening situation in our lives. Yet we want to tell the people who face them on a daily basis how to handle it.

So we should just leave everything up to cops and let them make their own decisions without questioning them? Doesn't that seem a little irresponsible and dangerous to you?

What you say here isn't congruent.

We have to let them make decisions in the line of fire; however, after the fact, we can review their performance to determine if they were malicious or not.

I don't read where he said we have to live with every decision cops make. I read that it is a hell of a lot tougher to play cop wearing the shoes and on the street than it is from behind your laptop screen.

But that's what we do now. We let them make decisions and then call them out when it seems their decisions were terrible. But you asked how anyone who isn't a cop can possibly judge their actions... We can. That's my point. We, the public, have to be the ones who judge whether or not their actions are okay or not. If we don't, then who should? Other cops?? I don't think THAT'S such a good idea.

Yes, that's the point. They are part of our civil society....not above it.