• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Point and Counterpoint Regarding Police Brutality - Which do you prefer?

Which position seems right to you?

  • Point: Sunil Dutta's "If you don't want to get hurt, don't challenge me."

    Votes: 1 5.0%
  • Counterpoint: Larry Womack's "They aren't enforcing the law, they are breaking it."

    Votes: 17 85.0%
  • Beer

    Votes: 6 30.0%

  • Total voters
    20
  • Poll closed .

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Point: Veteran Cop: 'If You Don't Want To Get Shot,' Shut Up -- Even If We're Violating Your Rights

Sunil Dutta, a 17-year veteran of the Los Angeles Police Department and professor of homeland security at Colorado Tech University, said, "I’m a cop. If you don’t want to get hurt, don’t challenge me." In a particularly telling passage, Dutta argues that citizens could deter police brutality if they were simply more cooperative, even when they're unjustly targeted."

Counterpoint: I'm an American Citizen. If You Want to Remain a Cop, Don't Violate My Human Rights

"When cops armed like an invading army force observers from Amnesty International to their knees, at gunpoint -- which happened in Ferguson the night before that piece ran -- they aren't enforcing the law, they are breaking it. They are criminals, they should lose their badges and they should be sued."
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
That cop has a s**** point. You can challenge all you want verbally. Especially when being "unjustly targeted".

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
The vast majority of law-enforcement officers are upstanding, if not outstanding. Based on his comments, Sunil Dutta has a lot of savvy, and bottom line, I think he's right, at least with respect to de-escalating a bad situation. You can't fight a wayward cop in the midst of his being wayward. You'll need to chill and stay under the radar so that when you file a complaint against him through Internal Affairs, you'll come up squeaky clean and they'll listen to you.

However, "As J.D. Tucille, managing editor of Reason.com, writes, the tone of Dutta's column reveals that he is ignorant of the broader concerns expressed by police critics."
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
The vast majority of law-enforcement officers are upstanding, if not outstanding. Based on his comments, Sunil Dutta has a lot of savvy, and bottom line, I think he's right, at least with respect to de-escalating a bad situation. You can't fight a wayward cop in the midst of his being wayward. You'll need to chill and stay under the radar so that when you file a complaint against him through Internal Affairs, you'll come up squeaky clean and they'll listen to you.

However, "As J.D. Tucille, managing editor of Reason.com, writes, the tone of Dutta's column reveals that he is ignorant of the broader concerns expressed by police critics."

+1 well said.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

The Truth

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Henrico
I think my browser just all of a sudden cut off the last word of the title or something...nvm then
 

SovereignAxe

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
791
Location
Elizabethton, TN
All three of those seem right to me, so I picked all three.

If you don't want to get hurt, even if a cop has already started violating your rights, you might want to start cooperating. Unfortunately we have to fight their transgressions in court, not on the streets. And yes, that's illegal.

Also, beer.
 

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
Why does Sunil Dutta remind me of this story:

The Rabbit



The LAPD, The FBI, and the CIA are all trying to prove that they are the best at apprehending criminals. The President decides to give them a test. He releases a rabbit into a forest and has each of them try to catch it.
The CIA goes in . They place animal informants throughout the forest. They question all plant and mineral witnesses. After three months of extensive investigations they conclude that rabbits do not exist.
The FBI goes in . After two weeks with no leads they burn the forest, killing everything in it, including the rabbit, and they make no apologies. The rabbit had it coming.
The LAPD goes in . They come out two hours later with a badly beaten raccoon. The raccoon is yelling: “Okay! Okay! I’m a rabbit! I’m a rabbit!”

he bear is yelling: "Okay! Okay! I'm a rabbit! I'm a rabbit!"
 
Last edited:

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
Why does Sunil Dutta remind me of this story:

The Rabbit



The LAPD, The FBI, and the CIA are all trying to prove that they are the best at apprehending criminals. The President decides to give them a test. He releases a rabbit into a forest and has each of them try to catch it.
The CIA goes in . They place animal informants throughout the forest. They question all plant and mineral witnesses. After three months of extensive investigations they conclude that rabbits do not exist.
The FBI goes in . After two weeks with no leads they burn the forest, killing everything in it, including the rabbit, and they make no apologies. The rabbit had it coming.
The LAPD goes in . They come out two hours later with a badly beaten raccoon. The raccoon is yelling: “Okay! Okay! I’m a rabbit! I’m a rabbit!”

he bear is yelling: "Okay! Okay! I'm a rabbit! I'm a rabbit!"

Scratching my head here just a little....

Since all the critters were burned to a crisp by the FBI, Where did LAPD find the raccoon? Or did they just bring their own? (Planting of evidence?)
 
Last edited:

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
And how do you base this conclusion ? Have any data supporting the conclusion?

Was wondering that myself. As the statement seems wildly unlikely to be true.

Why are you questioning this conclusion? Have you any data supporting the contrary?

The statement in question: "The vast majority of law-enforcement officers are upstanding, if not outstanding."

Anecdotal "evidence" to the contrary isn't evidence at all. It's anecdote.

Even a large number of events to the contrary, even recorded on video, only supports the statement, if the number of events is but a tiny percentage of all events.

For example, let's say you managed to record 10,000 such events. Whoopee!

But let's examine that in the light of logical, reason, and rational analysis:

Given:

1. Let's temporarily assume you find evidence of 10,000 events of police brutality per year.

2. Briefings by the local police department report there are approximately 1,100 citizens in the U.S. for every police officer.

3. U.S. Census data reports there are 317 million citizens.

4. Do the math: 317,000,000/1,100 = 288,182 police officers.

5. Checking the math, the Bureau of Labor and Statics claims there are 780,000, not 288,181. Thus, the actual ratio is 406 to 1, not 1,100 to 1.

6. The average citizen interacts with law enforcement once every three years. Thus, there are 106 million interactions per year.

7. Out of 106 million interactions per year, you're holding up evidence of 10,000 events of police brutality.

8. Do the math: 10,000 / 106,000,000 * 100 = 0.009434%, or 1 event of police brutality for every 10,600 interactions.

One in 10,600.

THAT'S how I base this conclusion.

To be fair, the actual number of cases of police brutality are far, far less than 10,000 per year. In fact, here's a list of key cases for the last 60 years. It's a short list.

Even if you managed to find 10,000 cases each year, it would still come to just ONE case of brutality out of 10,600 interactions, lending tremendous credence to my statement, "The vast majority of law-enforcement officers are upstanding, if not outstanding."

The only way anyone could make any claim to the contrary is if they're incapable of doing basic math, or totally incapable of rational thought.
 
Top