Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 76

Thread: Armed? Or Unarmed?

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    Armed? Or Unarmed?

    Huge discussions on Facebook lately of cop brutality. Talk by AG Lynch of opening investigations into potential civil rights violations of these murderous perps.

    Here's an excellent video of just how fast things can go bad out there for our men and women in blue.

    https://youtu.be/0K2-NEo3NVU

    Please think about this long and hard the next time you consider criticizing them for doing their job by taking down a murderous perp, regardless of the color of his skin. I noticed a number of the bad guys in this video were white. Color of skin DOES NOT MATTER. Bad is bad. If you don't like people who share your skin color giving you a bad rap, then stop inciting them to riot and/or shoot good people.

    Our law enforcement community works hard to put these people behind bars for a long, long time. They deserve our appreciation, not our disdain.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    A fine balance to bashing.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,880
    sorry since9, what happen to police training 101 of officer standing behind vehicle w/service pistol drawn; ordering driver out, hands up, facing front; ordering driver to get on your knees or prone w/arms out; then officer moving in to knelling/prone driver.

    this is nothing but an inattentive officer forgetting their protocals.

    similar to a fireman rushing into a burning building whose roof is about to collapse to rescue an animal.

    or an electrician who fails to check the circuits they are working on to see if they are live...after another tells them they shut power off.

    results the same...injured officer, fireman, or electrician.

    ipse

    added: behind bars or in graves ~ rightly or wrongly!!
    Last edited by solus; 07-10-2016 at 01:32 PM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Get a new job if you don't like the one you have now .. this is America.

    My job is more dangerous than any cops. So says OSHA.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Walsh County, North Dakota
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    sorry since9, what happen to police training 101 of officer standing behind vehicle w/service pistol drawn; ordering driver out, hands up, facing front; ordering driver to get on your knees or prone w/arms out; then officer moving in to knelling/prone driver.
    Sure! Cause every situation can be handled the same way. Every situation allows the officer ample time to retreat to the rear of the vehicle, pull out their pistol, etc. Sorry, nothing goes according to plan, nothing goes according to the training scenarios. Pretty sure everybody knows that.

    Yes, if you have the opportunity, fall back on your training. IF you do NOT have the opportunity, exercise disciplined initiative and take care of the situation in the best way that you know how. Do the wrong people die on occaision? Yes. It sucks. Nobody likes that. Do the wrong people die often? Nope, thank God for that.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by JTHunter View Post
    You WORK?!?
    I thought you spent all your time videoing cops and posting here!
    I mean - 16,000 posts in 4 years?!? SHEEZ!
    Reported as 'member bashing'. Please contribute to the discussion, not a mod, but It makes no sense to excoriate someone with a comment on topic.

    As to the cops, I think they should completely do away with all driver interactions interdictions and just issue tickets. Go back to being meter maids for moving violations. Exceptions would be reckless driving. Crack down on DUI. 2x and you're out. 2 reckless driving convictions and the judge has an option to review and suspend license for a year.

    Stop putting it all on the cops or staties. Back off from trying to save the world one 'fishing expedition at a time'. Institute strict rules of engagement.

  7. #7
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Tneedham View Post
    ... Do the wrong people die on occasion? Yes. It sucks. Nobody likes that. ...
    Cavalier attitude. "Sucks" is not the word that jumps to my mind if I were the surviving family member of a wrongful death at the hands of a law breaking cop.

    Case in point, a off-duty cop kills a citizen in a "road rage" incident. Video of the incident seems to indicate that the cop lied when recounting the incident. He has been relieved of his badge and service weapon and reassigned. Manslaughter charges are likely to be filed. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...badge-gun.html

    Yeah, it just sucks that DeIrawn Small was shot by a cop simply trying to get home at the end of his shift. But, on the bright side a tax payer backed check should make things good.

    Then again, come to think of it, the cop was off-duty so maybe this incident does not count.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Cavalier attitude. "Sucks" is not the word that jumps to my mind if I were the surviving family member of a wrongful death at the hands of a law breaking cop.
    What word would you use to describe being the victim of a crime committed by a repeat offender who was acquitted of a previous, violent crime on a "technicality" (or more accurately, on a constitutional protection)?

    I mean, it sucks when a person is the victim of armed assault and kidnapping at the hands of someone we all "know" has committed a brutal double homicide but walked free. But letting such men walk free when the state fails to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt is part of the cost of living in a free society.

    It sucks that some 40,000 people die in traffic crashes every year in the USA. But there is a price to be paid for nearly ubiquitous access to automobiles and the freedom of travel that brings.

    It sucks that about 16,000 persons a year commit suicide with guns here in the USA. It sucks that several hundred innocent folks are killed each year in this nation in accidents (NDs) involving firearms. There is a price to be paid for the freedoms to keep and bear arms.

    With all due respect, you are making a man an offender for a word. It is common to use the term "it sucks..." when discussing horrible outcomes that nobody wants to see, but that may be argued as unavoidable. A kid dying or being maimed in a car crash, or a due to an ND, or even because he had access to a firearm in a moment of severe depression are all horribly unspeakable tragedies, especially to those who love or loved the kid. All have been used to attack our freedoms and we here certainly reject as invalid any attempt to claim that the relatively rare suicide, criminal homicide, or extremely rare accidental death involving firearms justifies giving up our RKBA.

    Likewise, I doubt many here would buy into an argument that OJ walking free or the risk of terrorism justifies tossing the protections afforded to accused and average citizens alike by the US Constitution.

    Your attempt to over-emotionalize a relatively rare event of police officers injuring or killing the wrong person are the same kind of tactic.

    Nobody likes the fact that sometimes the cops make horrible mistakes. But short of joining the anarchists in wanting to eliminate the police and all of government, there is no way to eliminate the rare, horrible mistake nor the rare bad apple who deliberately infringes another's rights. All we can do is work to minimize.

    Some seem to think that eliminating QI is the magic bullet (no pun intended). They might be right. Or it may be a case of every hard problem having a simple solution...that is wrong. I don't know.

    But I know that attacking someone because he said "it sucks" rather than some more emotional laden phrase isn't intellectually honest given how we are most likely to respond to emotional appeals that take a side of an argument we reject.

    You can do better, sir.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  9. #9
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,735
    Unfortunately words have consequences. But, cliche statements used to describe a situation in general conversation is acceptable just because sometimes the proper term is not on the tip of our tongs. Suggesting a better term to describe a situation is acceptable, however, criticizing the use does not move the subject matter forward.
    I'm just say'n.....

  10. #10
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    ...

    You can do better, sir.

    Charles
    Do not patronize me. Reasonable and respectful discourse is accomplished by addressing the point made by a poster you respond to.
    Yes, if you have the opportunity, fall back on your training. IF you do NOT have the opportunity, exercise disciplined initiative and take care of the situation in the best way that you know how. Do the wrong people die on occasion? Yes. It sucks. Nobody likes that. Do the wrong people die often? Nope, thank God for that.
    Tneedham is clearly addressing the actions of cops. The unjustified loss of a human life must not be reduced down to "That sucks, sure...but it is the cost of doing business" where LE is concerned. Qualified immunity enables these "best way you know how" incidents because the likelihood that a cop will be held to account for violating the law is low.

    Follow the letter of the law that we all must follow, not a department policy that is shaped by court cases, Terry v. Ohio, Heien, Strieff.

    If a mistake is made then let black letter law be the guide, not a court case. Let a jury decide if a cop acted reasonably under the law.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  11. #11
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Do not patronize me. Reasonable and respectful discourse is accomplished by addressing the point made by a poster you respond to.
    I responded to your points of making an issue over Tneedham's choice of words not being strong or emotional enough for you.

    I was not patronizing, but being civil while attempting to give you the benefit of the doubt. It seems that benefit was my mistake as you are intent on taking offense and trying to make anyone who doesn't fully agree with you in this instance, an offender for their word choice.

    "Reasonable and respectful discourse is accomplished by addressing the point made by a poster you respond to" NOT by getting overly hung up on the exact phraseology used to express those points.

    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    The unjustified loss of a human life must not be reduced down to "That sucks, sure...but it is the cost of doing business" where LE is concerned.
    As I noted in my response and you've chosen not address, such verbiage is commonly used across many areas of life including accidental deaths involving cars and guns, known violent criminals being released into society rather than violating their rights, and so on. If Thneedham had written, "The wrongful loss of human life when cops make mistakes is a horrific crime and tragedy of unspeakable proportions but I see no way to completely eliminate that loss..." would your response be materially different?

    You are focusing on the words used, rather than on the message. You completely ignored my examples of where we often use imperfect shorthand to express our feelings about loss of innocent life. By your own standard, you are not engaging in "reasonable and respectful discourse" at this point.



    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Qualified immunityenables these "best way you know how" incidents because the likelihood that a cop will be held to account for violating the law is low.
    I completely acknowledged that some of you believe elimination of QI would dramatically improve the situation. I have not disagreed with you. I'm just not fully convinced that eliminating QI is the magic bullet or even that the benefits would outweigh the costs. I'm not prepared at this point to debate that issue with you. I'm just not fully prepared to agree with you. Does that preclude your ability to engage in reasonable and respectful discourse with me? Is there nothing to discuss except QI?


    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Follow the letter of the law that we all must follow, not a department policy that is shaped by court cases, Terry v. Ohio, Heien, Strieff.
    Laws are shaped by court cases for better or worse. We cannot sing the praises of Heller or McDonald in forcing improvements (however minor or slow in coming) to DC, Chicago, and other areas while asserting that Terry is entirely illegitimate. If the court has no power to shape laws, we have lots of laws to repeal. If the court has proper power to shape laws, then we need to recognize that the Constitution is not going to guarantee us everything we want. Some things have to be won politically rather than judicially.

    Moreover, I recognize that police officers are tasked to work that I am not. I get to run away from gun fire. They run towards it. It is their job to investigate crimes. Said crimes are often committed by persons who don't care to be found out and will go to violent lengths to avoid being taken into custody. I rarely have any legal standing to stop another person or vehicle and investigate crimes. Police often have legal standing to do exactly that. I react to crime in a purely defensive manner with my only goal to be escaping with my life and limb intact. Officers often have to take proactive actions as they investigate crimes. Even in a reactive situation, they retain a legal obligation to make an arrest without inflicting injury whenever possible.

    I'm not going to give up my right to use deadly force in cases where a cop my have some obligation to avoid deadly force in exchange for officer's being constrained by exactly the same limits that are imposed on me. I don't make traffic stops. I don't serve warrants. I don't keep the peace or enforce the laws. They do. They also enjoy taxpayer funded training, have some number of colleagues to assist them just a radio call away, and are physical fit free from illness, injury, or disability that places them at any special risk in a physical altercation. So joe public's reaction in a dark alley gets to escalate to deadly force a lot sooner than does cops, all else being equal.

    I believe police officers are necessary. I recognize they have special responsibilities compared to joe public. I cannot judge every interaction exactly as I would a somewhat similar interaction involving a private citizen because private citizens simply do not do the work police officers do.


    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    If a mistake is made then let black letter law be the guide, not a court case. Let a jury decide if a cop acted reasonably under the law.
    And if a jury decides the cops did act reasonably, as in the Rodney King case, do we accept that? Or do we demand a second trial for "violation of civil rights"? Do we tacitly or overtly justify those who riot or assassinate cops when decisions don't go the way they have decided they must? Or perhaps when decisions are slower coming that some think they must?

    If this cop was incompetent and killed a man needlessly, I want to see him punished.

    If this cop acted negligently, I want to see him punished.

    If he acted with any kind of malice, I want to see him legally hung out to dry spending many years in a deep, dark hole.

    If, despite what has come to light so far, he acted entirely appropriately against a real threat, what I want won't matter a bit. Odds are his career will be over, his life threatened, and his family subjected to horrible stresses, simply because far too many people are way too much like an old KKK lynch mob than they would be willing to admit.

    I'd like to see the facts come to light and determinations made based on the particulars of this individual case, rather than with prejudices about cops. Things like presupposing because he enjoys QI he is less careful than he should be, or that because department policies adhere to court cases rather than your or my particular view of the constitution that anyone one who follows said policies is a crook or idiot or worse make it that much more difficult to actually look at the facts objectively.

    Charles
    Last edited by utbagpiper; 07-13-2016 at 01:09 PM.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  12. #12
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,278
    Now reverse the videos putting the police officer as the shooter, and the lawful citizen being shot. It is bad either way, but more innocent citizens are shot then police officers. The most dangerous part of being a police officer is getting into a vehicle, because that is where most officers die on the job.

    Nobody should get ambushed.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    Now reverse the videos putting the police officer as the shooter, and the lawful citizen being shot. It is bad either way, but more innocent citizens are shot then police officers. The most dangerous part of being a police officer is getting into a vehicle, because that is where most officers die on the job.

    Nobody should get ambushed.
    Since 9-11 more Americans have died from police than terrorism.

  14. #14
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Since 9-11 more Americans have died from police than terrorism.
    An internet search for "more dead from police than terrorism" reveals articles claiming a person is 9 time more likely to die at hands of the police than from a terrorist. Other articles from the same search claim 55, 58, and 8 times more likely.

    Considering that police officers are tasked to investigate and apprehend far more run-of-the-mill criminals than they are terrorists, the comparison between cops and terrorists is totally irrelevant anyway. A person is probably more likely to die at the hands of a cop than from a lightening strike. Which tells us absolutely nothing useful at all.

    Furthermore, I strongly suspect that those compiling these numbers and making these claims are lumping together both innocent persons wrongly killed by cops, as well as violent criminals who were killed while actively threatening or even taking the lives of innocent persons. In contrast, all victims of terrorism in this nation were innocent.

    Anyone who lumps innocent victims in with violent criminals is showing the same kind of anti-cop bigotry, using the same kind of dishonest tactics, as shown by gun grabbers who lump homicides and suicides together, or who include 25 year old gang bangers in their figures of "children" killed by guns.

    Looked at another way, there are somewhere between 400 and maybe 1000 persons killed by police each year in this nation of 320 million persons, depending on whose numbers you believe and who gets included (EG: is someone who died in a high speed chase a victim of the police or of the driver who is fleeing the police?).

    I've seen claims of over 12 million arrests made each year in this nation. How many million traffic stops each year? How many million other official interactions between police and private citizens (both LAC and criminal) each year?

    I cannot find any credible claims about how many of those killed by the police were innocent vs how many were violent criminals actively trying to harm police officers or other innocent persons.

    Meaningless "statistics" that do nothing more than incite bigotries are worse than worthless. They amount to bashing.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Since 9-11 more Americans have died from police than terrorism.
    Not innocent Americans. Not by a long shot.

    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    Furthermore, I strongly suspect that those compiling these numbers and making these claims are lumping together both innocent persons wrongly killed by cops, as well as violent criminals who were killed while actively threatening or even taking the lives of innocent persons. In contrast, all victims of terrorism in this nation were innocent.
    Couldn't have said it better myself. Well done, as is the rest of your post.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Not innocent Americans. Not by a long shot.
    We Americans are presumed innocent until found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of peers. A public servant behind an assault rifle is not a peer or a juror. When we abandon that standard, like our flag is a 'standard', then the rule of men reigns.

    Presume is true absent contrary evidence.

    Would the relationship be clearer if the public servants were stoning their victims at the direction of a religious authority?
    Last edited by Nightmare; 07-15-2016 at 06:51 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  17. #17
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,616
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Since 9-11 more Americans have died from police than terrorism.
    Cite please.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Lynchburg
    Posts
    591
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Get a new job if you don't like the one you have now .. this is America.

    My job is more dangerous than any cops. So says OSHA.

    I did not know OSHA rated the dangers of internet trolling. Always learning something it seems.

    Nemo

  19. #19
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    An internet search for "more dead from police than terrorism" reveals articles claiming a person is 9 time more likely to die at hands of the police than from a terrorist. Other articles from the same search claim 55, 58, and 8 times more likely.

    Considering that police officers are tasked to investigate and apprehend far more run-of-the-mill criminals than they are terrorists, the comparison between cops and terrorists is totally irrelevant anyway. A person is probably more likely to die at the hands of a cop than from a lightening strike. Which tells us absolutely nothing useful at all.

    Furthermore, I strongly suspect that those compiling these numbers and making these claims are lumping together both innocent persons wrongly killed by cops, as well as violent criminals who were killed while actively threatening or even taking the lives of innocent persons. In contrast, all victims of terrorism in this nation were innocent.

    Anyone who lumps innocent victims in with violent criminals is showing the same kind of anti-cop bigotry, using the same kind of dishonest tactics, as shown by gun grabbers who lump homicides and suicides together, or who include 25 year old gang bangers in their figures of "children" killed by guns.

    Looked at another way, there are somewhere between 400 and maybe 1000 persons killed by police each year in this nation of 320 million persons, depending on whose numbers you believe and who gets included (EG: is someone who died in a high speed chase a victim of the police or of the driver who is fleeing the police?).

    I've seen claims of over 12 million arrests made each year in this nation. How many million traffic stops each year? How many million other official interactions between police and private citizens (both LAC and criminal) each year?

    I cannot find any credible claims about how many of those killed by the police were innocent vs how many were violent criminals actively trying to harm police officers or other innocent persons.

    Meaningless "statistics" that do nothing more than incite bigotries are worse than worthless. They amount to bashing.

    Charles
    and true to form...not one cite to provide any credible reference to your latest rambling post mate.

    typical...

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 07-15-2016 at 09:25 PM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    What qualified immunity? Police and all agents of the Government can and should be held accountable..
    We have in this country something called " The criminal Civil Rights Statutes" as defined in title 18 U.S.C section 241.. Conspiracy against rights.
    [Also Title 18 section 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law..

    See the following:

    United states v Ehrlichman
    Screws v United States
    United states v Lanier
    United States v Schatzle--- a great case on excessive force by a government agent.
    United states v sneak

    There is always criminal redress to wrongs committed by government agents against citizens.. The issue is getting the Feds involved to make the case..
    There is also civil redress under title U.S.C. 42 section 1983... Again for deprivation of rights under color of law...

    Government agents that are trained with tax payer dollars to use firearms and trained in proper self defense tactics should be held to a high standard..
    One issue I suspect is that some police are simply not trained properly and put out on the streets with the mentally of " lets get home safe tonight".
    They shot first and talk later.. Again the feds should be reviewing any actions that look suspect.. if a citizen is handcuffed and restrained there simply is no justification for shooting him/her or beating him/her.. Some where there needs to be some basic "common sense" practiced by law enforcement.

    My .02
    Regards
    CCJ
    Last edited by countryclubjoe; 07-16-2016 at 03:24 AM.
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  21. #21
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,880
    well CCJ, most current cite i can find shows 20 cities under doj consent decrees...

    the feds are protecting its citizens...ask them

    not that i see the decrees prevented baton rouge or MN deaths...oh wait the decree are issued after the fact...

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  22. #22
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Huge discussions on Facebook lately of cop brutality. Talk by AG Lynch of opening investigations into potential civil rights violations of these murderous perps.

    Here's an excellent video of just how fast things can go bad out there for our men and women in blue.

    https://youtu.be/0K2-NEo3NVU

    Please think about this long and hard the next time you consider criticizing them for doing their job by taking down a murderous perp, regardless of the color of his skin. I noticed a number of the bad guys in this video were white. Color of skin DOES NOT MATTER. Bad is bad. If you don't like people who share your skin color giving you a bad rap, then stop inciting them to riot and/or shoot good people.

    Our law enforcement community works hard to put these people behind bars for a long, long time. They deserve our appreciation, not our disdain.


    i wish they all worked just was hard to honor their oath and respect our rights. the 1% of cops that act unlawfully make the 99% look bad.

    but their job is voluntary. no one forced them to be a cop.

    if they can't handle the pressure of the job AND honor their oath.....then it's time to pick a new job.

    rights are more important than "safety".

    don't feel safe? find a new job.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    doubt is a distraction from reality. fear is acknowledging doubt as reality.

    it's time to tap in to a higher reality; the one you were made for.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    i wish they all worked just was hard to honor their oath and respect our rights. the 1% of cops that act unlawfully make the 99% look bad.

    but their job is voluntary. no one forced them to be a cop.

    if they can't handle the pressure of the job AND honor their oath.....then it's time to pick a new job.

    rights are more important than "safety".

    don't feel safe? find a new job.
    However if the so called 99% protect and stand together with the 1% and do nothing, then said 99% is just as guilty..

    regards
    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  24. #24
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    We Americans are presumed innocent until found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of peers. A public servant behind an assault rifle is not a peer or a juror.
    So does this mean that all those DGUs by LACs each year are really "innocent persons" getting shot?

    While I expect a physically fit, well trained police officer, outfitted with a full duty belt to have some non-lethal options that many LACs do not have, I also recognize that a police officer does have a right to defend himself against criminal violence. You will note that I made the distinction between "innocent" and "violent" NOT between "innocent" and "duly convicted of a crime."

    When an LAC uses deadly force morally and legally to defend his life and limb against criminal violence, he is not acting as judge, jury, or executioner. He is repelling criminal violence to defend himself. Ditto when a police officer uses deadly force morally and legally to defend himself or other innocent persons.

    Cops using deadly force when it isn't morally and legally justified is another story, but by all metrics I can find, is--most fortunately--rather rare once we get far enough past initial, fabricated, racial outrage to realize in how many cases of claimed "hands up, don't shoot", the deceased didn't have his hands up and had the kind of criminal record to suggest they might be prone to unwarranted violence against police officers.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  25. #25
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    I responded to your points of making an issue over Tneedham's choice of words not being strong or emotional enough for you. ...
    I clarified my position on this topic. You disagree with my position, OK.

    ... I'm not prepared at this point to debate that issue with you. ...
    OK

    Laws are shaped by court cases for better or worse. ...
    A unconstitutional law enforced by cops harms a citizen. The courts hold the state accountable for their unconstitutional act, the cops enforcement action. The law is then discovered to need changing or repealing, via the courts, so the state will not harm a citizen in the future. How many cops know that many prior restraint guns laws are unconstitutional yet they enforce them anyway and harm innocent law abiding citizens.

    Moreover, I recognize that police officers are tasked to work that I am not. I get to run away from gun fire. ...
    I think that a cop shoots because he believes he fears for his life. Using deadly force to protect the public at large where his life is not in obvious peril is harder to prove as reasonable.

    I'm not going to give up my right to use deadly force ...
    Utah may be different, MO has the same standards for cops & civilians when the use of deadly force is justifiable.

    I believe police officers are necessary. ...
    I agree. But, some of my reasons for having cops may be different from yours.

    And if a jury decides the cops did act reasonably, ...
    A jury finds for the cop, justice is served. A cop not getting to a jury is the travesty in my view. The killing of the COO of Napster is a good example. http://www.businessinsider.com/polic...ecutive-2014-8

    If this cop was incompetent and killed a man needlessly, I want to see him punished. ...
    I try to focus on what the law states explicitly. Court decisions state that a infringement of your liberty is OK depending the specific circumstances. In MO your brief "inconvenience" is a arrest, a unlawful arrest given that the cop is guessing that your car looked like a suspect car.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •