Yeah, I'm not getting this either (and frankly, not up for spending a much-welcomed Friday evening in that manner).
bsL - you beg explanation (which has been provided on my part before). It doesn't.
Have you actually read about what went down in this constantly mentioned 4-on-1 situation?
Also, this "side" shit...is bullshit. Maybe that too is part of the problem.
Anyway...
You don't want to debate, then what's the point of playing. (Oh that's right, you like to piggyback). I know exactly what went down with the 4 cops on 1, and you were very rigid with your defense for the cop's behavior (in another cop thread).
Of course, you don't want to spend a Friday night addressing your need to live in denial.
And do me a favor and actually read the three links I posted, especially the one about the Czech Republic and the one after with a lot of bolding. Unless, you're not going to debate...
You've been spouting off a ton about other people (precisely Hedo in a somewhat stalking and personal manner) and how they need to answer things and how they need to read things... yet Jeff asked you a modest question, after some time passed I requested to hear your response... and you've still managed to duck it.
* For the record, I read your piece. So what? It reflected an opinion that was the same as yours. Didn't you admonish people for quoting others and passing it off as their opinion?
A lot of talking, but not a lot of walking from my perspective.
Oh, so taking a cop's view of it all that specifies the law and why they don't shoot in the leg is supporting my view? Showing how the Czech Republic have a bit of humanity in their force merely supports my view? This is how the rest of the world lives... With HUMILITY. Those articles explained the semantics they use in training to make officers and people like you believe that shooting in the chest is merely shooting to harm, not to kill.
You’re 55 Times More Likely to be Killed by a Police Officer than a Terrorist Posted on March 4, 2015 by WashingtonsBlog Police Killings Grossly Underreported
We previously reported that Americans are 9 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.
But it turns out that our numbers were incorrect …
This isn’t surprising, given that:
“Reliable estimates of the number of justifiable homicides committed by police officers in the United States do not exist.” A study of killings by police from 1999 to 2002 in the Central Florida region found that the national databases included (in Florida) only one-fourth of the number of persons killed by police as reported in the local news media.
The Guardian reports today:
An average of 545 people killed by local and state law enforcement officers in the US went uncounted in the country’s most authoritative crime statistics every year for almost a decade, according to a report released on Tuesday.
The first-ever attempt by US record-keepers to estimate the number of uncounted “law enforcement homicides” exposed previous official tallies as capturing less than half of the real picture. The new estimate – an average of 928 people killed by police annually over eight recent years, compared to 383 in published FBI data – amounted to a more glaring admission than ever before of the government’s failure to track how many people police kill.
The revelation called into particular question the FBI practice of publishing annual totals of “justifiable homicides by law enforcement” – tallies that are widely cited in the media and elsewhere as the most accurate official count of police homicides.
As shown below, that means that you’re 55 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.
You’re Much More Likely to Be Killed By Brain-Eating Parasites, Texting While Driving, Toddlers, Lightning, Falling Out of Bed, Alcoholism, Food Poisoning, Choking On Food, a Financial Crash, Obesity, Medical Errors or “Autoerotic Asphyxiation” than by Terrorists
Daniel Benjamin – the Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the United States Department of State from 2009 to 2012 – noted last month (at 10:22):
The total number of deaths from terrorism in recent years has been extremely small in the West. And the threat itself has been considerably reduced. Given all the headlines people don’t have that perception; but if you look at the statistics that is the case.
Time Magazine noted in 2013 that the chance of dying in a terrorist attack in the United States from 2007 to 2011, according to Richard Barrett – coordinator of the United Nations al Qaeda/Taliban Monitoring Team – was 1 in 20 million.
Let’s look at specific numbers …
The U.S. Department of State reports that only 17 U.S. citizens were killed worldwide as a result of terrorism in 2011.* That figure includes deaths in Afghanistan, Iraq and all other theaters of war.
In contrast, the American agency which tracks health-related issues – the U.S. Centers for Disease Control – rounds up the most prevalent causes of death in the United States: (more at link)
And your refusal to actually address the problem continues...
What was the question?
Hedonist chose to answer me when I wanted to know from the deniers how it is conscionable that shooting a man to death when there are 4 police against 1. She responded with a "look at my previous posts" which is saying nothing, she chose to dance around the question, something every one cannot seem to answer for me. What say you 30? How is it conscienable?
Now I am willing to answer Jeff' question as soon as I can find out what it was...
Sorry folks, friday night scotch posts aren't my best work...much like my post-scotch saturday morning work wont be my best lol
Thirty, my tone was out of line and a bit extreme, but I stand by the fact that you do ridicule those of us on the "other side" of the argument. You make statements regularly that make a caricature of us with labels like "anti cop contingent" and provide continual suggestions that we hate cops and so forth You do use sarcasm quite a bit as well, seeking to make our position look silly by taking it to extremes.
It amazes me to hear some of you defend the criminals of this country. Once again, some of you throw blame in the wrong direction. Poor training, over zealous police, and racism is is the reason in your eyes. Forget about the fact that these guys ARE BREAKING THE LAW. The argument of "assault shouldn't result in the death penalty" is tiresome. No, it shouldnt. If the ass holes had just bothered to have his day in court.
Since when is the life of a cop more important than the life of the criminal? When the criminal decided he wanted to reach for the cops gun, or assault the officer. That's when. And that's not a choice made by the cop. It was made by the CRIMINAL. Most of you guys want to hang the cop before the evidence is publicly known. (See Darren Wilson). Hell, even when the evidence is out there, most of you will find a way to make excuses for the criminal.
America's police force doesn't need better training. They need the support of the people they protect. Here's the bottom line: if you just listen to them, they won't shoot you. Why can't some of you understand this concept? There is no excuse for what Michael Brown did. Or this guy in Wisconsin. They deserved what they got. Not because they were black, or poor, or mentally ill. Because they were stupid. Because they didn't listen. Because they HIT A POLICE OFFICER. When has that ever been acceptable?
Yeah because just listening worked out so well for Tamir Rice and John Crawford and countless others. You can rant and rave about CRIMINALS all you want, people who aren't breaking the law will continue to be shot and killed because of the unconditional support people like you give to police.
I do not give unconditional support to police. Unjustified shootings should be prosecuted. The problem is that you guys find wrong doing in the justified shootings. The Tamir rice shooting will probably go down as justified. I believe where they (the cops) screwed up is falsifying the report not knowing it was on tape.
Publicly bashing every cop that shoots somebody is not the answer. Yes, there have been unjustified killings by police over the years. But not every one is unjustified. Most of them are 100% justified.
Sorry for the out of line tone to you as well. That being said, you say you don't give unconditional support and then go on to defend the police murdering a 12 yr old boy without even giving him the benefit of 5 seconds to do right or wrong. The tape is clear, he threatened no one and the cops gunned him down before he had a chance to comply with the orders they claim to have given. "Over the years"???? How about every year if not every month. "Most of them are 100% justified"... There is no middle ground? Can't a shooting be 75% justified? That's a problem BSLs links point to, it's all or none with police and their weapons, never a middle ground. Your language sounds more like unconditional support than a true case by case analysis, because you give extraordinary weight to the cops in the balance of every situation.
You’re 55 Times More Likely to be Killed by a Police Officer than a Terrorist Posted on March 4, 2015 by WashingtonsBlog Police Killings Grossly Underreported
We previously reported that Americans are 9 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.
But it turns out that our numbers were incorrect …
This isn’t surprising, given that:
“Reliable estimates of the number of justifiable homicides committed by police officers in the United States do not exist.” A study of killings by police from 1999 to 2002 in the Central Florida region found that the national databases included (in Florida) only one-fourth of the number of persons killed by police as reported in the local news media.
The Guardian reports today:
An average of 545 people killed by local and state law enforcement officers in the US went uncounted in the country’s most authoritative crime statistics every year for almost a decade, according to a report released on Tuesday.
The first-ever attempt by US record-keepers to estimate the number of uncounted “law enforcement homicides” exposed previous official tallies as capturing less than half of the real picture. The new estimate – an average of 928 people killed by police annually over eight recent years, compared to 383 in published FBI data – amounted to a more glaring admission than ever before of the government’s failure to track how many people police kill.
The revelation called into particular question the FBI practice of publishing annual totals of “justifiable homicides by law enforcement” – tallies that are widely cited in the media and elsewhere as the most accurate official count of police homicides.
As shown below, that means that you’re 55 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.
You’re Much More Likely to Be Killed By Brain-Eating Parasites, Texting While Driving, Toddlers, Lightning, Falling Out of Bed, Alcoholism, Food Poisoning, Choking On Food, a Financial Crash, Obesity, Medical Errors or “Autoerotic Asphyxiation” than by Terrorists
Daniel Benjamin – the Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the United States Department of State from 2009 to 2012 – noted last month (at 10:22):
The total number of deaths from terrorism in recent years has been extremely small in the West. And the threat itself has been considerably reduced. Given all the headlines people don’t have that perception; but if you look at the statistics that is the case.
Time Magazine noted in 2013 that the chance of dying in a terrorist attack in the United States from 2007 to 2011, according to Richard Barrett – coordinator of the United Nations al Qaeda/Taliban Monitoring Team – was 1 in 20 million.
Let’s look at specific numbers …
The U.S. Department of State reports that only 17 U.S. citizens were killed worldwide as a result of terrorism in 2011.* That figure includes deaths in Afghanistan, Iraq and all other theaters of war.
In contrast, the American agency which tracks health-related issues – the U.S. Centers for Disease Control – rounds up the most prevalent causes of death in the United States: (more at link)
Thanks for posting that. I read the Guardian once on the crapper. It sure was useful when I ran out of toilet paper and had to use it to wipe my ass.
It amazes me to hear some of you defend the criminals of this country. Once again, some of you throw blame in the wrong direction. Poor training, over zealous police, and racism is is the reason in your eyes. Forget about the fact that these guys ARE BREAKING THE LAW. The argument of "assault shouldn't result in the death penalty" is tiresome. No, it shouldnt. If the ass holes had just bothered to have his day in court.
Since when is the life of a cop more important than the life of the criminal? When the criminal decided he wanted to reach for the cops gun, or assault the officer. That's when. And that's not a choice made by the cop. It was made by the CRIMINAL. Most of you guys want to hang the cop before the evidence is publicly known. (See Darren Wilson). Hell, even when the evidence is out there, most of you will find a way to make excuses for the criminal.
America's police force doesn't need better training. They need the support of the people they protect. Here's the bottom line: if you just listen to them, they won't shoot you. Why can't some of you understand this concept? There is no excuse for what Michael Brown did. Or this guy in Wisconsin. They deserved what they got. Not because they were black, or poor, or mentally ill. Because they were stupid. Because they didn't listen. Because they HIT A POLICE OFFICER. When has that ever been acceptable?
Yeah because just listening worked out so well for Tamir Rice and John Crawford and countless others. You can rant and rave about CRIMINALS all you want, people who aren't breaking the law will continue to be shot and killed because of the unconditional support people like you give to police.
I do not give unconditional support to police. Unjustified shootings should be prosecuted. The problem is that you guys find wrong doing in the justified shootings. The Tamir rice shooting will probably go down as justified. I believe where they (the cops) screwed up is falsifying the report not knowing it was on tape.
Publicly bashing every cop that shoots somebody is not the answer. Yes, there have been unjustified killings by police over the years. But not every one is unjustified. Most of them are 100% justified.
Sorry for the out of line tone to you as well. That being said, you say you don't give unconditional support and then go on to defend the police murdering a 12 yr old boy without even giving him the benefit of 5 seconds to do right or wrong. The tape is clear, he threatened no one and the cops gunned him down before he had a chance to comply with the orders they claim to have given. "Over the years"???? How about every year if not every month. "Most of them are 100% justified"... There is no middle ground? Can't a shooting be 75% justified? That's a problem BSLs links point to, it's all or none with police and their weapons, never a middle ground. Your language sounds more like unconditional support than a true case by case analysis, because you give extraordinary weight to the cops in the balance of every situation.
What is the middle ground you are searching for? I do not think Tamir Rice should have been killed. Consider the call that the cops heard from the dispatcher. I'm sorry, I can't remember it word for word but it went something like "person with a gun pointing it at people in the park." There was no mention that it was a child or that the gun may have been a toy as the caller said in her 911 call. The cops pull up and see this kid with a gun, that regardless of what anyone says, looks real. He was shot. That sucks, it really does. From a police stand point however, what else could they have done? Imagine for a minute if that had been an actual crazy person with an actual gun. Had the police been nonchalant about it, one if not both of them could have been killed.
When the police gave their accounts of what happened, they lied. Had they come out and told the truth, nothing would happen to them. I have not read anything about that case in a while so I do not know if they have been fired, or quit, or administrative leave.
My point is that their is no middle ground. Hindsight is always 20/20 and the benefit of the doubt should not go to the criminals.
guys, guys, guys.... U ain't gonna convice or change anyone's mind on this subject no matter how hard you try. I know it's maddening but it is what it is. I assure you Liberal society will be getting the Type of policing they are demanding ....it's already happening and Turning out to be a lot safer for officers, Unless assassinations of police continue, then you will see the real militarization of the Police. Tax payers will suffer Unfortionately in that the bad guys will no longer fear the police and will continue to do what they are bred to do. And a couple of years from now the same kuckleheads will be on here posting non sence about why the Police didn't do anything. Protect yourself and your family any which way you can and when the police do the report for you, they will be sympathetic and understanding from all the wonderful sensitivity training required.
It amazes me to hear some of you defend the criminals of this country. Once again, some of you throw blame in the wrong direction. Poor training, over zealous police, and racism is is the reason in your eyes. Forget about the fact that these guys ARE BREAKING THE LAW. The argument of "assault shouldn't result in the death penalty" is tiresome. No, it shouldnt. If the ass holes had just bothered to have his day in court.
Since when is the life of a cop more important than the life of the criminal? When the criminal decided he wanted to reach for the cops gun, or assault the officer. That's when. And that's not a choice made by the cop. It was made by the CRIMINAL. Most of you guys want to hang the cop before the evidence is publicly known. (See Darren Wilson). Hell, even when the evidence is out there, most of you will find a way to make excuses for the criminal.
America's police force doesn't need better training. They need the support of the people they protect. Here's the bottom line: if you just listen to them, they won't shoot you. Why can't some of you understand this concept? There is no excuse for what Michael Brown did. Or this guy in Wisconsin. They deserved what they got. Not because they were black, or poor, or mentally ill. Because they were stupid. Because they didn't listen. Because they HIT A POLICE OFFICER. When has that ever been acceptable?
Yeah because just listening worked out so well for Tamir Rice and John Crawford and countless others. You can rant and rave about CRIMINALS all you want, people who aren't breaking the law will continue to be shot and killed because of the unconditional support people like you give to police.
I do not give unconditional support to police. Unjustified shootings should be prosecuted. The problem is that you guys find wrong doing in the justified shootings. The Tamir rice shooting will probably go down as justified. I believe where they (the cops) screwed up is falsifying the report not knowing it was on tape.
Publicly bashing every cop that shoots somebody is not the answer. Yes, there have been unjustified killings by police over the years. But not every one is unjustified. Most of them are 100% justified.
Sorry for the out of line tone to you as well. That being said, you say you don't give unconditional support and then go on to defend the police murdering a 12 yr old boy without even giving him the benefit of 5 seconds to do right or wrong. The tape is clear, he threatened no one and the cops gunned him down before he had a chance to comply with the orders they claim to have given. "Over the years"???? How about every year if not every month. "Most of them are 100% justified"... There is no middle ground? Can't a shooting be 75% justified? That's a problem BSLs links point to, it's all or none with police and their weapons, never a middle ground. Your language sounds more like unconditional support than a true case by case analysis, because you give extraordinary weight to the cops in the balance of every situation.
What is the middle ground you are searching for? I do not think Tamir Rice should have been killed. Consider the call that the cops heard from the dispatcher. I'm sorry, I can't remember it word for word but it went something like "person with a gun pointing it at people in the park." There was no mention that it was a child or that the gun may have been a toy as the caller said in her 911 call. The cops pull up and see this kid with a gun, that regardless of what anyone says, looks real. He was shot. That sucks, it really does. From a police stand point however, what else could they have done? Imagine for a minute if that had been an actual crazy person with an actual gun. Had the police been nonchalant about it, one if not both of them could have been killed.
When the police gave their accounts of what happened, they lied. Had they come out and told the truth, nothing would happen to them. I have not read anything about that case in a while so I do not know if they have been fired, or quit, or administrative leave.
My point is that their is no middle ground. Hindsight is always 20/20 and the benefit of the doubt should not go to the criminals.
Some parental oversight may have been in order here.
Boy,I'm glad I haven't jumped I on this one in a while,but I can see some things never change.BSL hates the police,our country and the sky is falling.While it seems the vast majority of other posters cleary have common sense and understand what's up.Thx Hedo,Jeff,Last,30,Dan for thinking clearly.Voices of reason. Oh and BSL,you do know Hedo is a Lady right? One which many of us consider in high regard.Just saying,before you come at her like a spider monkey.
It amazes me to hear some of you defend the criminals of this country. Once again, some of you throw blame in the wrong direction. Poor training, over zealous police, and racism is is the reason in your eyes. Forget about the fact that these guys ARE BREAKING THE LAW. The argument of "assault shouldn't result in the death penalty" is tiresome. No, it shouldnt. If the ass holes had just bothered to have his day in court.
Since when is the life of a cop more important than the life of the criminal? When the criminal decided he wanted to reach for the cops gun, or assault the officer. That's when. And that's not a choice made by the cop. It was made by the CRIMINAL. Most of you guys want to hang the cop before the evidence is publicly known. (See Darren Wilson). Hell, even when the evidence is out there, most of you will find a way to make excuses for the criminal.
America's police force doesn't need better training. They need the support of the people they protect. Here's the bottom line: if you just listen to them, they won't shoot you. Why can't some of you understand this concept? There is no excuse for what Michael Brown did. Or this guy in Wisconsin. They deserved what they got. Not because they were black, or poor, or mentally ill. Because they were stupid. Because they didn't listen. Because they HIT A POLICE OFFICER. When has that ever been acceptable?
Yeah because just listening worked out so well for Tamir Rice and John Crawford and countless others. You can rant and rave about CRIMINALS all you want, people who aren't breaking the law will continue to be shot and killed because of the unconditional support people like you give to police.
I do not give unconditional support to police. Unjustified shootings should be prosecuted. The problem is that you guys find wrong doing in the justified shootings. The Tamir rice shooting will probably go down as justified. I believe where they (the cops) screwed up is falsifying the report not knowing it was on tape.
Publicly bashing every cop that shoots somebody is not the answer. Yes, there have been unjustified killings by police over the years. But not every one is unjustified. Most of them are 100% justified.
Sorry for the out of line tone to you as well. That being said, you say you don't give unconditional support and then go on to defend the police murdering a 12 yr old boy without even giving him the benefit of 5 seconds to do right or wrong. The tape is clear, he threatened no one and the cops gunned him down before he had a chance to comply with the orders they claim to have given. "Over the years"???? How about every year if not every month. "Most of them are 100% justified"... There is no middle ground? Can't a shooting be 75% justified? That's a problem BSLs links point to, it's all or none with police and their weapons, never a middle ground. Your language sounds more like unconditional support than a true case by case analysis, because you give extraordinary weight to the cops in the balance of every situation.
What is the middle ground you are searching for? I do not think Tamir Rice should have been killed. Consider the call that the cops heard from the dispatcher. I'm sorry, I can't remember it word for word but it went something like "person with a gun pointing it at people in the park." There was no mention that it was a child or that the gun may have been a toy as the caller said in her 911 call. The cops pull up and see this kid with a gun, that regardless of what anyone says, looks real. He was shot. That sucks, it really does. From a police stand point however, what else could they have done? Imagine for a minute if that had been an actual crazy person with an actual gun. Had the police been nonchalant about it, one if not both of them could have been killed.
When the police gave their accounts of what happened, they lied. Had they come out and told the truth, nothing would happen to them. I have not read anything about that case in a while so I do not know if they have been fired, or quit, or administrative leave.
My point is that their is no middle ground. Hindsight is always 20/20 and the benefit of the doubt should not go to the criminals.
"I do not think Tamir Rice should have been killed." "From a police stand point however, what else could they have done?" Which is it? Even in ththe middle ground I'm not sure it can both.
The middle ground is where a case like Rice lives. Did the cops have justification? Yes. Should Rice be alive today? Yes. Middle ground. ""That sucks, it really does. From a police stand point however, what else could they have done? Imagine for a minute if that had been an actual crazy person with an actual gun. Had the police been nonchalant about it, one if not both of them could have been killed."" I think they easily could have handled it way better. They need to be capable of reading a situation better and faster. That he was a kid and not behaving aggressively should temper their reaction and put a little time into the situation, if it had, he would be alive still. Good cops manage this every day, it is a disservice to them to stand behind the bad cops who shoot prematurely. Instead, they shot him nearly instantly, and if you don't think his being black was a factor you are not appraising reality very well. "Hindsight is always 20/20 and the benefit of the doubt should not go to the criminals." TAMIR RICE WAS NOT A FUCKING CRIMINAL This is the unconditional support I am talking about. Consequences come from hindsight, thats just reality. If nobody is willing to judge an officers actions because hindsight is 20/20, that is tacit complicity with the existence and propagation of police misuse of force and unnecessary deaths.
It amazes me to hear some of you defend the criminals of this country. Once again, some of you throw blame in the wrong direction. Poor training, over zealous police, and racism is is the reason in your eyes. Forget about the fact that these guys ARE BREAKING THE LAW. The argument of "assault shouldn't result in the death penalty" is tiresome. No, it shouldnt. If the ass holes had just bothered to have his day in court.
Since when is the life of a cop more important than the life of the criminal? When the criminal decided he wanted to reach for the cops gun, or assault the officer. That's when. And that's not a choice made by the cop. It was made by the CRIMINAL. Most of you guys want to hang the cop before the evidence is publicly known. (See Darren Wilson). Hell, even when the evidence is out there, most of you will find a way to make excuses for the criminal.
America's police force doesn't need better training. They need the support of the people they protect. Here's the bottom line: if you just listen to them, they won't shoot you. Why can't some of you understand this concept? There is no excuse for what Michael Brown did. Or this guy in Wisconsin. They deserved what they got. Not because they were black, or poor, or mentally ill. Because they were stupid. Because they didn't listen. Because they HIT A POLICE OFFICER. When has that ever been acceptable?
Yeah because just listening worked out so well for Tamir Rice and John Crawford and countless others. You can rant and rave about CRIMINALS all you want, people who aren't breaking the law will continue to be shot and killed because of the unconditional support people like you give to police.
I do not give unconditional support to police. Unjustified shootings should be prosecuted. The problem is that you guys find wrong doing in the justified shootings. The Tamir rice shooting will probably go down as justified. I believe where they (the cops) screwed up is falsifying the report not knowing it was on tape.
Publicly bashing every cop that shoots somebody is not the answer. Yes, there have been unjustified killings by police over the years. But not every one is unjustified. Most of them are 100% justified.
Sorry for the out of line tone to you as well. That being said, you say you don't give unconditional support and then go on to defend the police murdering a 12 yr old boy without even giving him the benefit of 5 seconds to do right or wrong. The tape is clear, he threatened no one and the cops gunned him down before he had a chance to comply with the orders they claim to have given. "Over the years"???? How about every year if not every month. "Most of them are 100% justified"... There is no middle ground? Can't a shooting be 75% justified? That's a problem BSLs links point to, it's all or none with police and their weapons, never a middle ground. Your language sounds more like unconditional support than a true case by case analysis, because you give extraordinary weight to the cops in the balance of every situation.
What is the middle ground you are searching for? I do not think Tamir Rice should have been killed. Consider the call that the cops heard from the dispatcher. I'm sorry, I can't remember it word for word but it went something like "person with a gun pointing it at people in the park." There was no mention that it was a child or that the gun may have been a toy as the caller said in her 911 call. The cops pull up and see this kid with a gun, that regardless of what anyone says, looks real. He was shot. That sucks, it really does. From a police stand point however, what else could they have done? Imagine for a minute if that had been an actual crazy person with an actual gun. Had the police been nonchalant about it, one if not both of them could have been killed.
When the police gave their accounts of what happened, they lied. Had they come out and told the truth, nothing would happen to them. I have not read anything about that case in a while so I do not know if they have been fired, or quit, or administrative leave.
My point is that their is no middle ground. Hindsight is always 20/20 and the benefit of the doubt should not go to the criminals.
Some parental oversight may have been in order here.
That's a stretch. He found the gun when he was away from home.
Did your parents keep you from roaming the neighborhood when you were 12?? Did your parents keep you from playing with guns?? At 12 did you never do stupid things?
guys, guys, guys.... U ain't gonna convice or change anyone's mind on this subject no matter how hard you try. I know it's maddening but it is what it is. I assure you Liberal society will be getting the Type of policing they are demanding ....it's already happening and Turning out to be a lot safer for officers, Unless assassinations of police continue, then you will see the real militarization of the Police. Tax payers will suffer Unfortionately in that the bad guys will no longer fear the police and will continue to do what they are bred to do. And a couple of years from now the same kuckleheads will be on here posting non sence about why the Police didn't do anything. Protect yourself and your family any which way you can and when the police do the report for you, they will be sympathetic and understanding from all the wonderful sensitivity training required.
Oh, so taking a cop's view of it all that specifies the law and why they don't shoot in the leg is supporting my view? Showing how the Czech Republic have a bit of humanity in their force merely supports my view? This is how the rest of the world lives... With HUMILITY. Those articles explained the semantics they use in training to make officers and people like you believe that shooting in the chest is merely shooting to harm, not to kill.
OK.
I read your pieces on the Czech Republic. What I would like to know, is all of the pertinent information you failed to provide; stati
Oh, so taking a cop's view of it all that specifies the law and why they don't shoot in the leg is supporting my view? Showing how the Czech Republic have a bit of humanity in their force merely supports my view? This is how the rest of the world lives... With HUMILITY. Those articles explained the semantics they use in training to make officers and people like you believe that shooting in the chest is merely shooting to harm, not to kill.
OK.
You showed how one country, with an extremely low crime rate, lives. Not the rest of the world. You cherry picked one nation's policies and procedures to suit your agenda.
I have seen documentaries and info pieces on that very subject which directly refute the claims made in your piece. From so-called "liberal media".
I have never shot a gun, nor will I ever, so I cannot speak from personal experience, but logic tells me that in the heat of the situation, shooting at anything but central mass is going to result in one thing a majority of the time: death of the cop/innocents. And your piece also stated that the Czecs do the same thing when being shot at; even worse, actually: two in the chest and one in the head. That is called execution. I have never once heard any report ever of any North American law enforcement agency training to shoot for the head.
you simply, and unfortunately, cannot compare any other country's gun culture and the ramifications of it with any other country. It has been attempted, and failed. Michael Moore tried to compare it to Canada. People here have just as many guns as Americans do. But civilians and cops don't kill at nearly the same rate as Americans do. Remember, gun culture isn't only about the criminals. It affects those who have to deal with that culture on a daily basis.
Should it change? Of course it should. Will it change? No, it won't.
What I would like to see, and really, I think the only legitimate comparison that could be made, is take cops from the US, and cops from other nations, and study their reaction times and methods in simulated scenarios.
As an aside, personal jabs won't get you very far around here. Be as passionate as you like, but this outright arrogance is a little off-putting, especially since it is clear this is nothing more than your opinion, not expertise.
Boy,I'm glad I haven't jumped I on this one in a while,but I can see some things never change.BSL hates the police,our country and the sky is falling.While it seems the vast majority of other posters cleary have common sense and understand what's up.Thx Hedo,Jeff,Last,30,Dan for thinking clearly.Voices of reason. Oh and BSL,you do know Hedo is a Lady right? One which many of us consider in high regard.Just saying,before you come at her like a spider monkey.
You've lost all credibility rr, with your labels as well. Good luck with that "all is black and white" perspective. It never serves anyone well. It's like you people are some insecure team of people who can't function without the others to piggyback on. You, like the others, read what you want, regardless of how many times we point out the real problems of this country. Continue to live in happy denial. And I'm a lady as well, so whatever.
"I do not think Tamir Rice should have been killed." "From a police stand point however, what else could they have done?" Which is it? Even in ththe middle ground I'm not sure it can both.
The middle ground is where a case like Rice lives. Did the cops have justification? Yes. Should Rice be alive today? Yes. Middle ground. ""That sucks, it really does. From a police stand point however, what else could they have done? Imagine for a minute if that had been an actual crazy person with an actual gun. Had the police been nonchalant about it, one if not both of them could have been killed."" I think they easily could have handled it way better. They need to be capable of reading a situation better and faster. That he was a kid and not behaving aggressively should temper their reaction and put a little time into the situation, if it had, he would be alive still. Good cops manage this every day, it is a disservice to them to stand behind the bad cops who shoot prematurely. Instead, they shot him nearly instantly, and if you don't think his being black was a factor you are not appraising reality very well. "Hindsight is always 20/20 and the benefit of the doubt should not go to the criminals." TAMIR RICE WAS NOT A FUCKING CRIMINAL This is the unconditional support I am talking about. Consequences come from hindsight, thats just reality. If nobody is willing to judge an officers actions because hindsight is 20/20, that is tacit complicity with the existence and propagation of police misuse of force and unnecessary deaths.
Unconditional support also comes from blind allegiance and the inability to think for ones self. And in this case, the inability to read the thousands of verification pieces that police brutality is very real and a very real problem with minorities in the U.S.
Oh, so taking a cop's view of it all that specifies the law and why they don't shoot in the leg is supporting my view? Showing how the Czech Republic have a bit of humanity in their force merely supports my view? This is how the rest of the world lives... With HUMILITY. Those articles explained the semantics they use in training to make officers and people like you believe that shooting in the chest is merely shooting to harm, not to kill.
OK.
I read your pieces on the Czech Republic. What I would like to know, is all of the pertinent information you failed to provide; stati
Oh, so taking a cop's view of it all that specifies the law and why they don't shoot in the leg is supporting my view? Showing how the Czech Republic have a bit of humanity in their force merely supports my view? This is how the rest of the world lives... With HUMILITY. Those articles explained the semantics they use in training to make officers and people like you believe that shooting in the chest is merely shooting to harm, not to kill.
OK.
You showed how one country, with an extremely low crime rate, lives. Not the rest of the world. You cherry picked one nation's policies and procedures to suit your agenda.
I have seen documentaries and info pieces on that very subject which directly refute the claims made in your piece. From so-called "liberal media".
I have never shot a gun, nor will I ever, so I cannot speak from personal experience, but logic tells me that in the heat of the situation, shooting at anything but central mass is going to result in one thing a majority of the time: death of the cop/innocents. And your piece also stated that the Czecs do the same thing when being shot at; even worse, actually: two in the chest and one in the head. That is called execution. I have never once heard any report ever of any North American law enforcement agency training to shoot for the head.
you simply, and unfortunately, cannot compare any other country's gun culture and the ramifications of it with any other country. It has been attempted, and failed. Michael Moore tried to compare it to Canada. People here have just as many guns as Americans do. But civilians and cops don't kill at nearly the same rate as Americans do. Remember, gun culture isn't only about the criminals. It affects those who have to deal with that culture on a daily basis.
Should it change? Of course it should. Will it change? No, it won't.
What I would like to see, and really, I think the only legitimate comparison that could be made, is take cops from the US, and cops from other nations, and study their reaction times and methods in simulated scenarios.
As an aside, personal jabs won't get you very far around here. Be as passionate as you like, but this outright arrogance is a little off-putting, especially since it is clear this is nothing more than your opinion, not expertise.
You really want me to find proven facts that the rest of Europe and beyond treat their people with more respect that American police do. Give me a break. You people supporting the police and their goodness by seeing this issue as a black and white issue have some kind of blockage that disallows reality from entering the brain. This is whats going on in America, if you choose to not recognize reality, you do live in denial. There's not much more that can be said about it. I can post thousands of articles and you guys refuse to verify the truth.
That Czech article specified that they don't shoot at all until the person starts shooting at police. Then and only then do they start shooting and defensively to kill. That seems plausible, but American police start shooting if someone has a toy gun in their hand. Or better yet, no weapon at all.
Things won't change because people won't open their eyes to the reality. There you go with it's my opinion again. Are you denying the national problem of police brutality and minorities? That's not an opinion, and that's what I'm talking about. And how about how it's conscionable to kill a man on the ground with 4 officers on him?
It amazes me to hear some of you defend the criminals of this country. Once again, some of you throw blame in the wrong direction. Poor training, over zealous police, and racism is is the reason in your eyes. Forget about the fact that these guys ARE BREAKING THE LAW. The argument of "assault shouldn't result in the death penalty" is tiresome. No, it shouldnt. If the ass holes had just bothered to have his day in court.
Since when is the life of a cop more important than the life of the criminal? When the criminal decided he wanted to reach for the cops gun, or assault the officer. That's when. And that's not a choice made by the cop. It was made by the CRIMINAL. Most of you guys want to hang the cop before the evidence is publicly known. (See Darren Wilson). Hell, even when the evidence is out there, most of you will find a way to make excuses for the criminal.
America's police force doesn't need better training. They need the support of the people they protect. Here's the bottom line: if you just listen to them, they won't shoot you. Why can't some of you understand this concept? There is no excuse for what Michael Brown did. Or this guy in Wisconsin. They deserved what they got. Not because they were black, or poor, or mentally ill. Because they were stupid. Because they didn't listen. Because they HIT A POLICE OFFICER. When has that ever been acceptable?
Yeah because just listening worked out so well for Tamir Rice and John Crawford and countless others. You can rant and rave about CRIMINALS all you want, people who aren't breaking the law will continue to be shot and killed because of the unconditional support people like you give to police.
I do not give unconditional support to police. Unjustified shootings should be prosecuted. The problem is that you guys find wrong doing in the justified shootings. The Tamir rice shooting will probably go down as justified. I believe where they (the cops) screwed up is falsifying the report not knowing it was on tape.
Publicly bashing every cop that shoots somebody is not the answer. Yes, there have been unjustified killings by police over the years. But not every one is unjustified. Most of them are 100% justified.
Sorry for the out of line tone to you as well. That being said, you say you don't give unconditional support and then go on to defend the police murdering a 12 yr old boy without even giving him the benefit of 5 seconds to do right or wrong. The tape is clear, he threatened no one and the cops gunned him down before he had a chance to comply with the orders they claim to have given. "Over the years"???? How about every year if not every month. "Most of them are 100% justified"... There is no middle ground? Can't a shooting be 75% justified? That's a problem BSLs links point to, it's all or none with police and their weapons, never a middle ground. Your language sounds more like unconditional support than a true case by case analysis, because you give extraordinary weight to the cops in the balance of every situation.
What is the middle ground you are searching for? I do not think Tamir Rice should have been killed. Consider the call that the cops heard from the dispatcher. I'm sorry, I can't remember it word for word but it went something like "person with a gun pointing it at people in the park." There was no mention that it was a child or that the gun may have been a toy as the caller said in her 911 call. The cops pull up and see this kid with a gun, that regardless of what anyone says, looks real. He was shot. That sucks, it really does. From a police stand point however, what else could they have done? Imagine for a minute if that had been an actual crazy person with an actual gun. Had the police been nonchalant about it, one if not both of them could have been killed.
When the police gave their accounts of what happened, they lied. Had they come out and told the truth, nothing would happen to them. I have not read anything about that case in a while so I do not know if they have been fired, or quit, or administrative leave.
My point is that their is no middle ground. Hindsight is always 20/20 and the benefit of the doubt should not go to the criminals.
Some parental oversight may have been in order here.
That's a stretch. He found the gun when he was away from home.
Did your parents keep you from roaming the neighborhood when you were 12?? Did your parents keep you from playing with guns?? At 12 did you never do stupid things?
No,yes and of course.That one Gambs I wish a little more forethought went into the situation and also think that particular officer jumped the gun.
It amazes me to hear some of you defend the criminals of this country. Once again, some of you throw blame in the wrong direction. Poor training, over zealous police, and racism is is the reason in your eyes. Forget about the fact that these guys ARE BREAKING THE LAW. The argument of "assault shouldn't result in the death penalty" is tiresome. No, it shouldnt. If the ass holes had just bothered to have his day in court.
Since when is the life of a cop more important than the life of the criminal? When the criminal decided he wanted to reach for the cops gun, or assault the officer. That's when. And that's not a choice made by the cop. It was made by the CRIMINAL. Most of you guys want to hang the cop before the evidence is publicly known. (See Darren Wilson). Hell, even when the evidence is out there, most of you will find a way to make excuses for the criminal.
America's police force doesn't need better training. They need the support of the people they protect. Here's the bottom line: if you just listen to them, they won't shoot you. Why can't some of you understand this concept? There is no excuse for what Michael Brown did. Or this guy in Wisconsin. They deserved what they got. Not because they were black, or poor, or mentally ill. Because they were stupid. Because they didn't listen. Because they HIT A POLICE OFFICER. When has that ever been acceptable?
Yeah because just listening worked out so well for Tamir Rice and John Crawford and countless others. You can rant and rave about CRIMINALS all you want, people who aren't breaking the law will continue to be shot and killed because of the unconditional support people like you give to police.
I do not give unconditional support to police. Unjustified shootings should be prosecuted. The problem is that you guys find wrong doing in the justified shootings. The Tamir rice shooting will probably go down as justified. I believe where they (the cops) screwed up is falsifying the report not knowing it was on tape.
Publicly bashing every cop that shoots somebody is not the answer. Yes, there have been unjustified killings by police over the years. But not every one is unjustified. Most of them are 100% justified.
Sorry for the out of line tone to you as well. That being said, you say you don't give unconditional support and then go on to defend the police murdering a 12 yr old boy without even giving him the benefit of 5 seconds to do right or wrong. The tape is clear, he threatened no one and the cops gunned him down before he had a chance to comply with the orders they claim to have given. "Over the years"???? How about every year if not every month. "Most of them are 100% justified"... There is no middle ground? Can't a shooting be 75% justified? That's a problem BSLs links point to, it's all or none with police and their weapons, never a middle ground. Your language sounds more like unconditional support than a true case by case analysis, because you give extraordinary weight to the cops in the balance of every situation.
What is the middle ground you are searching for? I do not think Tamir Rice should have been killed. Consider the call that the cops heard from the dispatcher. I'm sorry, I can't remember it word for word but it went something like "person with a gun pointing it at people in the park." There was no mention that it was a child or that the gun may have been a toy as the caller said in her 911 call. The cops pull up and see this kid with a gun, that regardless of what anyone says, looks real. He was shot. That sucks, it really does. From a police stand point however, what else could they have done? Imagine for a minute if that had been an actual crazy person with an actual gun. Had the police been nonchalant about it, one if not both of them could have been killed.
When the police gave their accounts of what happened, they lied. Had they come out and told the truth, nothing would happen to them. I have not read anything about that case in a while so I do not know if they have been fired, or quit, or administrative leave.
My point is that their is no middle ground. Hindsight is always 20/20 and the benefit of the doubt should not go to the criminals.
Some parental oversight may have been in order here.
That's a stretch. He found the gun when he was away from home.
Did your parents keep you from roaming the neighborhood when you were 12?? Did your parents keep you from playing with guns?? At 12 did you never do stupid things?
No,yes and of course.That one Gambs I wish a little more forethought went into the situation and also think that particular officer jumped the gun.
Yeah it is a real tragedy for sure, I can't imagine.
Oh, so taking a cop's view of it all that specifies the law and why they don't shoot in the leg is supporting my view? Showing how the Czech Republic have a bit of humanity in their force merely supports my view? This is how the rest of the world lives... With HUMILITY. Those articles explained the semantics they use in training to make officers and people like you believe that shooting in the chest is merely shooting to harm, not to kill.
OK.
I read your pieces on the Czech Republic. What I would like to know, is all of the pertinent information you failed to provide; stati
Oh, so taking a cop's view of it all that specifies the law and why they don't shoot in the leg is supporting my view? Showing how the Czech Republic have a bit of humanity in their force merely supports my view? This is how the rest of the world lives... With HUMILITY. Those articles explained the semantics they use in training to make officers and people like you believe that shooting in the chest is merely shooting to harm, not to kill.
OK.
You showed how one country, with an extremely low crime rate, lives. Not the rest of the world. You cherry picked one nation's policies and procedures to suit your agenda.
I have seen documentaries and info pieces on that very subject which directly refute the claims made in your piece. From so-called "liberal media".
I have never shot a gun, nor will I ever, so I cannot speak from personal experience, but logic tells me that in the heat of the situation, shooting at anything but central mass is going to result in one thing a majority of the time: death of the cop/innocents. And your piece also stated that the Czecs do the same thing when being shot at; even worse, actually: two in the chest and one in the head. That is called execution. I have never once heard any report ever of any North American law enforcement agency training to shoot for the head.
you simply, and unfortunately, cannot compare any other country's gun culture and the ramifications of it with any other country. It has been attempted, and failed. Michael Moore tried to compare it to Canada. People here have just as many guns as Americans do. But civilians and cops don't kill at nearly the same rate as Americans do. Remember, gun culture isn't only about the criminals. It affects those who have to deal with that culture on a daily basis.
Should it change? Of course it should. Will it change? No, it won't.
What I would like to see, and really, I think the only legitimate comparison that could be made, is take cops from the US, and cops from other nations, and study their reaction times and methods in simulated scenarios.
As an aside, personal jabs won't get you very far around here. Be as passionate as you like, but this outright arrogance is a little off-putting, especially since it is clear this is nothing more than your opinion, not expertise.
Boy,I'm glad I haven't jumped I on this one in a while,but I can see some things never change.BSL hates the police,our country and the sky is falling.While it seems the vast majority of other posters cleary have common sense and understand what's up.Thx Hedo,Jeff,Last,30,Dan for thinking clearly.Voices of reason. Oh and BSL,you do know Hedo is a Lady right? One which many of us consider in high regard.Just saying,before you come at her like a spider monkey.
You've lost all credibility rr, with your labels as well. Good luck with that "all is black and white" perspective. It never serves anyone well. It's like you people are some insecure team of people who can't function without the others to piggyback on. You, like the others, read what you want, regardless of how many times we point out the real problems of this country. Continue to live in happy denial. And I'm a lady as well, so whatever.
A. Your assuming I had credibility to begin with. B.relax,take a breath and see what's good every once in while. C.im anything but insecure,just the opposite actually. D.What??? Your female?how about dem apples.You learn something new everyday on these boards. E,How is the Chech republic law enforcement a proper comparison?
Boy,I'm glad I haven't jumped I on this one in a while,but I can see some things never change.BSL hates the police,our country and the sky is falling.While it seems the vast majority of other posters cleary have common sense and understand what's up.Thx Hedo,Jeff,Last,30,Dan for thinking clearly.Voices of reason. Oh and BSL,you do know Hedo is a Lady right? One which many of us consider in high regard.Just saying,before you come at her like a spider monkey.
You've lost all credibility rr, with your labels as well. Good luck with that "all is black and white" perspective. It never serves anyone well. It's like you people are some insecure team of people who can't function without the others to piggyback on. You, like the others, read what you want, regardless of how many times we point out the real problems of this country. Continue to live in happy denial. And I'm a lady as well, so whatever.
A. Your assuming I had credibility to begin with. B.relax,take a breath and see what's good every once in while. C.im anything but insecure,just the opposite actually. D.What??? Your female?how about dem apples.You learn something new everyday on these boards. E,How is the Chech republic law enforcement a proper comparison?
It doesn't have to be a perfect comparison. It just shows that there are law enforcement officials with higher standards on force than we have and works against the myth that shooting at the legs can't be effective. If you can't bring someone down with 9 bullets in quick succession you have no business in the business! As pointed out, a lower trajectory would be safer for bystanders...it isn't a solution for every problem, but it ought to be in the fucking tool box!
Boy,I'm glad I haven't jumped I on this one in a while,but I can see some things never change.BSL hates the police,our country and the sky is falling.While it seems the vast majority of other posters cleary have common sense and understand what's up.Thx Hedo,Jeff,Last,30,Dan for thinking clearly.Voices of reason. Oh and BSL,you do know Hedo is a Lady right? One which many of us consider in high regard.Just saying,before you come at her like a spider monkey.
You've lost all credibility rr, with your labels as well. Good luck with that "all is black and white" perspective. It never serves anyone well. It's like you people are some insecure team of people who can't function without the others to piggyback on. You, like the others, read what you want, regardless of how many times we point out the real problems of this country. Continue to live in happy denial. And I'm a lady as well, so whatever.
A. Your assuming I had credibility to begin with. B.relax,take a breath and see what's good every once in while. C.im anything but insecure,just the opposite actually. D.What??? Your female?how about dem apples.You learn something new everyday on these boards. E,How is the Chech republic law enforcement a proper comparison?
It doesn't have to be a perfect comparison. It just shows that there are law enforcement officials with higher standards on force than we have and works against the myth that shooting at the legs can't be effective. If you can't bring someone down with 9 bullets in quick succession you have no business in the business! As pointed out, a lower trajectory would be safer for bystanders...it isn't a solution for every problem, but it ought to be in the fucking tool box!
Remember split second life or death descisions most the time.Aiming for broadest target is proper protocol.We must put ourselves in the officers shoes.They want to go home and tuck their kids into bed and kiss their spouses.Hindsight of course is a clarifying view.But we all know most the time that's a luxury these officers don't have. Speaking of what's in the tool box.Would tranquilizer rounds that stop elephants or Buffaloes work.Just spit balling here.
Boy,I'm glad I haven't jumped I on this one in a while,but I can see some things never change.BSL hates the police,our country and the sky is falling.While it seems the vast majority of other posters cleary have common sense and understand what's up.Thx Hedo,Jeff,Last,30,Dan for thinking clearly.Voices of reason. Oh and BSL,you do know Hedo is a Lady right? One which many of us consider in high regard.Just saying,before you come at her like a spider monkey.
You've lost all credibility rr, with your labels as well. Good luck with that "all is black and white" perspective. It never serves anyone well. It's like you people are some insecure team of people who can't function without the others to piggyback on. You, like the others, read what you want, regardless of how many times we point out the real problems of this country. Continue to live in happy denial. And I'm a lady as well, so whatever.
A. Your assuming I had credibility to begin with. B.relax,take a breath and see what's good every once in while. C.im anything but insecure,just the opposite actually. D.What??? Your female?how about dem apples.You learn something new everyday on these boards. E,How is the Chech republic law enforcement a proper comparison?
It doesn't have to be a perfect comparison. It just shows that there are law enforcement officials with higher standards on force than we have and works against the myth that shooting at the legs can't be effective. If you can't bring someone down with 9 bullets in quick succession you have no business in the business! As pointed out, a lower trajectory would be safer for bystanders...it isn't a solution for every problem, but it ought to be in the fucking tool box!
Remember split second life or death descisions most the time.Aiming for broadest target is proper protocol.We must put ourselves in the officers shoes.They want to go home and tuck their kids into bed and kiss their spouses.Hindsight of course is a clarifying view.But we all know most the time that's a luxury these officers don't have. Speaking of what's in the tool box.Would tranquilizer rounds that stop elephants or Buffaloes work.Just spit balling here.
I understand the split second issue, but that's what intense training is for... You create muscle memory and make reactions nearly aautomatic. If training involves non-lethal shooting it would save lives. The chest shots are still an option in the nearly inconceivable scenario where a suspect continues to advance on legs that have holes in them.
I know I know, I am asking alot of police, but shouldn't we demand excellence and nothing less from the only members of our society in which we entrust the authority to end life based on split second judgements?
Comments
Of course, you don't want to spend a Friday night addressing your need to live in denial.
* For the record, I read your piece. So what? It reflected an opinion that was the same as yours. Didn't you admonish people for quoting others and passing it off as their opinion?
A lot of talking, but not a lot of walking from my perspective.
Oh, so taking a cop's view of it all that specifies the law and why they don't shoot in the leg is supporting my view? Showing how the Czech Republic have a bit of humanity in their force merely supports my view? This is how the rest of the world lives... With HUMILITY. Those articles explained the semantics they use in training to make officers and people like you believe that shooting in the chest is merely shooting to harm, not to kill.
OK.
You did it again.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/03/youre-55-times-likely-killed-police-officer-terrorist.html
What was the question?
Hedonist chose to answer me when I wanted to know from the deniers how it is conscionable that shooting a man to death when there are 4 police against 1. She responded with a "look at my previous posts" which is saying nothing, she chose to dance around the question, something every one cannot seem to answer for me. What say you 30? How is it conscienable?
Now I am willing to answer Jeff' question as soon as I can find out what it was...
Thirty, my tone was out of line and a bit extreme, but I stand by the fact that you do ridicule those of us on the "other side" of the argument. You make statements regularly that make a caricature of us with labels like "anti cop contingent" and provide continual suggestions that we hate cops and so forth You do use sarcasm quite a bit as well, seeking to make our position look silly by taking it to extremes.
That being said, you say you don't give unconditional support and then go on to defend the police murdering a 12 yr old boy without even giving him the benefit of 5 seconds to do right or wrong. The tape is clear, he threatened no one and the cops gunned him down before he had a chance to comply with the orders they claim to have given. "Over the years"???? How about every year if not every month. "Most of them are 100% justified"... There is no middle ground?
Can't a shooting be 75% justified? That's a problem BSLs links point to, it's all or none with police and their weapons, never a middle ground.
Your language sounds more like unconditional support than a true case by case analysis, because you give extraordinary weight to the cops in the balance of every situation.
When the police gave their accounts of what happened, they lied. Had they come out and told the truth, nothing would happen to them. I have not read anything about that case in a while so I do not know if they have been fired, or quit, or administrative leave.
My point is that their is no middle ground. Hindsight is always 20/20 and the benefit of the doubt should not go to the criminals.
Oh and BSL,you do know Hedo is a Lady right? One which many of us consider in high regard.Just saying,before you come at her like a spider monkey.
"From a police stand point however, what else could they have done?"
Which is it? Even in ththe middle ground I'm not sure it can both.
The middle ground is where a case like Rice lives. Did the cops have justification? Yes. Should Rice be alive today? Yes. Middle ground.
""That sucks, it really does. From a police stand point however, what else could they have done? Imagine for a minute if that had been an actual crazy person with an actual gun. Had the police been nonchalant about it, one if not both of them could have been killed.""
I think they easily could have handled it way better. They need to be capable of reading a situation better and faster. That he was a kid and not behaving aggressively should temper their reaction and put a little time into the situation, if it had, he would be alive still. Good cops manage this every day, it is a disservice to them to stand behind the bad cops who shoot prematurely. Instead, they shot him nearly instantly, and if you don't think his being black was a factor you are not appraising reality very well.
"Hindsight is always 20/20 and the benefit of the doubt should not go to the criminals."
TAMIR RICE WAS NOT A FUCKING CRIMINAL
This is the unconditional support I am talking about. Consequences come from hindsight, thats just reality. If nobody is willing to judge an officers actions because hindsight is 20/20, that is tacit complicity with the existence and propagation of police misuse of force and unnecessary deaths.
Did your parents keep you from roaming the neighborhood when you were 12??
Did your parents keep you from playing with guns??
At 12 did you never do stupid things?
I have seen documentaries and info pieces on that very subject which directly refute the claims made in your piece. From so-called "liberal media".
I have never shot a gun, nor will I ever, so I cannot speak from personal experience, but logic tells me that in the heat of the situation, shooting at anything but central mass is going to result in one thing a majority of the time: death of the cop/innocents. And your piece also stated that the Czecs do the same thing when being shot at; even worse, actually: two in the chest and one in the head. That is called execution. I have never once heard any report ever of any North American law enforcement agency training to shoot for the head.
you simply, and unfortunately, cannot compare any other country's gun culture and the ramifications of it with any other country. It has been attempted, and failed. Michael Moore tried to compare it to Canada. People here have just as many guns as Americans do. But civilians and cops don't kill at nearly the same rate as Americans do. Remember, gun culture isn't only about the criminals. It affects those who have to deal with that culture on a daily basis.
Should it change? Of course it should. Will it change? No, it won't.
What I would like to see, and really, I think the only legitimate comparison that could be made, is take cops from the US, and cops from other nations, and study their reaction times and methods in simulated scenarios.
As an aside, personal jabs won't get you very far around here. Be as passionate as you like, but this outright arrogance is a little off-putting, especially since it is clear this is nothing more than your opinion, not expertise.
www.headstonesband.com
That Czech article specified that they don't shoot at all until the person starts shooting at police. Then and only then do they start shooting and defensively to kill. That seems plausible, but American police start shooting if someone has a toy gun in their hand. Or better yet, no weapon at all.
Things won't change because people won't open their eyes to the reality. There you go with it's my opinion again. Are you denying the national problem of police brutality and minorities? That's not an opinion, and that's what I'm talking about. And how about how it's conscionable to kill a man on the ground with 4 officers on him?
B.relax,take a breath and see what's good every once in while.
C.im anything but insecure,just the opposite actually.
D.What??? Your female?how about dem apples.You learn something new everyday on these boards.
E,How is the Chech republic law enforcement a proper comparison?
If you can't bring someone down with 9 bullets in quick succession you have no business in the business! As pointed out, a lower trajectory would be safer for bystanders...it isn't a solution for every problem, but it ought to be in the fucking tool box!
Speaking of what's in the tool box.Would tranquilizer rounds that stop elephants or Buffaloes work.Just spit balling here.
I know I know, I am asking alot of police, but shouldn't we demand excellence and nothing less from the only members of our society in which we entrust the authority to end life based on split second judgements?