Started By
Message
re: Life Long dawg fan
Posted on 9/10/20 at 10:49 pm to Whiznot
Posted on 9/10/20 at 10:49 pm to Whiznot
quote:
position is attractive to authoritarian bullies.
That's the key. Plenty of armed thugs with crew cuts among their ranks, getting off on dressing up like storm troopers.
Double police salaries and require a Bachelor's degree (real, not U of Phoenix or some other online b.s.) as a minimum and a Master's (real, not U of Phoenix of some other online b.s.) for any hope of advancement and watch the magical transformation of law enforcement over time. Get rid of police unions, too, since they basically protect the bad apples.
This post was edited on 9/10/20 at 11:02 pm
1
Posted on 9/10/20 at 10:54 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
That's simply not true as the rule, and those that are should be convicted of murder and thrown in jail or executed by the state.
Except that they almost never are. Very few cops are prosecuted when involved in questionable shootings and even fewer are convicted. Cities have often paid out millions in settlements to families even while the involved officers were not even fired, let alone prosecuted.
The problem isn't that most police are going around killing people without justification. The problem is that those who do often get away with it or get off very lightly.
Posted on 9/10/20 at 11:01 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
as more information has been made available to the public, are less and less justified.
How so? Was the cop feeling his life was endangered as he was crushing the guy's neck with his boot?
In another time - and ESPECIALLY without cam footage - the Floyd killer cops would have been joking about this incident right now in some bar.
Posted on 9/10/20 at 11:16 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
What I'm saying is that if God doesn't exist, then there is no objective value or dignity within humanity.
Agreed. However, I guess the Lutheran distinction is that there is an objective morality in the world, which is established by the holiness of God, but which does not require the adherence to a particular biblical standard. Though salvation is only possible through the recognition and acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice, all of God’s children can recognize his splendor and advance his morality, even if through their own ways.
quote:
Take an evolutionary worldview for example
Sure there are atheists who believe in evolution, but also plenty of deeply religious people, as well. God formed us in his image, which includes the nature to dream and discover. Darwin was a deeply religious (and Calvinist) Christian who saw evolution as proof of God’s design.
Cheers, and frick Alabama.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 7:26 am to Lucius Clay
quote:
That's the key. Plenty of armed thugs with crew cuts among their ranks, getting off on dressing up like storm troopers.
Double police salaries and require a Bachelor's degree (real, not U of Phoenix or some other online b.s.) as a minimum and a Master's (real, not U of Phoenix of some other online b.s.) for any hope of advancement and watch the magical transformation of law enforcement over time. Get rid of police unions, too, since they basically protect the bad apples.
It’s just odd that hero police are the ones who rescue a kid from a burning car or did CPR on some dude choking in a restaurant and heros of the anti-police movement are habitual, violent felons who aggressively resisted arrest. You admit there are some armed thug cops out there. In fact, that is one of the themes of the anti-police movement. That being the case, how much culpability does a felon who violently resists arrest have in all these cases? No one wants to give ground on it. Making murals of them as some sort of hero only goes to widen the divide. These actions tell me it is more about creating dissent and separatism, than legitimately wanting justice. As I said before, BLM is taking advantage of black folks to promote a different agenda. One that is not helping black folks or race relations in general. This does not mean that I think our police are not in need of a lot of changes, but changes won’t come until the elephant in the room is acknowledged.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 7:32 am to Peter Buck
Well put
Posted on 9/11/20 at 8:07 am to DawgCountry
Do away with police all together. Upgrade them to street judges.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 9:24 am to Lucius Clay
quote:It is very difficult to prove guilt of excessive force with law enforcement, at least historically, due to their own protections under the law. It makes sense that they would be in fear of their lives as an excuse to use deadly force given how dangerous their jobs are.
Except that they almost never are. Very few cops are prosecuted when involved in questionable shootings and even fewer are convicted. Cities have often paid out millions in settlements to families even while the involved officers were not even fired, let alone prosecuted.
The problem isn't that most police are going around killing people without justification. The problem is that those who do often get away with it or get off very lightly.
One good thing that came out of the protests and riots from the Michael Brown shooting is the push for more body cams nationwide. Those cameras help paint a clearer picture of whether or not force is justified that didn't exist previously when it was mostly a he-said-she-said between a cop and a criminal
I agree that it's difficult to get justice from an unlawful force incident, however I think it's going to get easier with technology improvements. Even so, the statistics don't show that officers are gunning down innocents in droves. If you're a black man in America, you're far more likely to be shot and killed by another black man than by a police officer, and the shootings that have made the news recently all involved resisting arrest. Just don't do it.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 9:28 am to Lucius Clay
quote:
Get rid of police unions, too, since they basically protect the bad apples.
That’s the key here. If we did that, a lot of things would rectify naturally. Police union collective bargaining agreements are incredibly strong, and makes it that even someone like Derek Chauvin could potentially be re-hired if the union bosses find the right arbitrator to “settle” the management-labor dispute.
I guarantee that without a union, police would self-police a lot better.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 9:31 am to Lucius Clay
quote:More information has been released, such as the autopsy reports that show Floyd had drugs in his system, including a lethal amount of fentanyl (fentanyl causes breathing problems, BTW). More information like the body camera footage and transcripts, which show Floyd saying "I can't breathe!" long before officer Chauvin (the guy who put his knee on Floyd's neck) showed up on the scene. That same footage showed the other officers talking to each other about Floyd's erratic behavior and questioning whether he was on drugs. It showed the other officers being polite to Floyd and offering to roll the windows down for him in the car where he was refusing (resisting) to go, claiming he was claustrophobic (even though he was just in his own car). It shows Floyd being asked to be laid down on the ground, as well.
How so? Was the cop feeling his life was endangered as he was crushing the guy's neck with his boot?
All that to say it's not as much of a cut-and-dried case of racist police abuse as was initially shown.
quote:They might be doing that anyway pretty soon. I wouldn't be surprised if they walk, given that they were overcharged. I suspect the overcharging was on purpose to get them to walk and to cause more riots for it, but that's just my opinion.
In another time - and ESPECIALLY without cam footage - the Floyd killer cops would have been joking about this incident right now in some bar.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 10:50 am to Peter Buck
quote:
That being the case, how much culpability does a felon who violently resists arrest have in all these cases?
This is the question that no one on that side is willing to answer, because they know it severely damages their argument.
quote:
Making murals of them as some sort of hero only goes to widen the divide. These actions tell me it is more about creating dissent and separatism, than legitimately wanting justice.
Imagine being Jacob Blake's rape victim or the woman who George Floyd robbed by holding a gun to her stomach when she was pregnant. Not only did those two worthless pieces of shite commit horrendous atrocities against those women, but now they're being held up as heroes and martyrs by athletes and politicians. Those two women have to see their assailants be propped up as heroes every single day. That has to be a horrific experience for them.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 11:11 am to VADawg
Serious question as I have not watched or read anything on these incidents in months!
Were they convicted of rape and burglary charges? Or just accused.
Were they convicted of rape and burglary charges? Or just accused.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 11:14 am to retooc
quote:
Were they convicted of rape and burglary charges? Or just accused.
Floyd was convicted of the burglary charges and spent several years in prison for it.
Blake's rape case is still pending but he will likely be convicted as well. The police were called the day he was shot because he was violating a restraining order that his victim filed by going back to her house.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 11:26 am to VADawg
Thank you for that information. I knew Floyd had been in the clank, just didn't know what for.
I know next to nothing about the other case. I had to stop reading and watching news several months ago. All stations lying about the Rona.
I know next to nothing about the other case. I had to stop reading and watching news several months ago. All stations lying about the Rona.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 1:20 pm to FooManChoo
Our justice system does not consider the victim when punishing a wrongdoer. And that cuts both ways - we don’t give a wrongdoer more time because his victim was especially traumatized, and we don’t give a wrongdoer less time because his victim was a scumbag. Criminal punishment serves three goals: retribution for the bad conduct, rehabilitating the offender, and deterring the offender and the general public from engaging in said bad behavior.
I could go vigilante and take out Jeffrey Dahmer and yet I would still be charged with first degree murder. It’s because as a society, we don’t tolerate vigilantism in the same way we do not tolerate police brutality, even if the victim probably deserved it.
I could go vigilante and take out Jeffrey Dahmer and yet I would still be charged with first degree murder. It’s because as a society, we don’t tolerate vigilantism in the same way we do not tolerate police brutality, even if the victim probably deserved it.
Posted on 9/11/20 at 4:57 pm to baconwaffle
My point wasn't that police brutality is somehow justified because the victim is a bad person. It was to call into question the material facts of the case to provide context beyond a cell phone video that caused so many people to jump to conclusions.
It would seem to follow that the officer's knee on the back of a man's neck would cause him to suffocate to death if all you went on was the video footage, especially when that man was saying he couldn't breathe. However, if you add in to the equation that the man was claiming he couldn't breathe prior to anyone kneeling on him and that he had a lethal dose of drugs in his system that typically cause breathing problems, it can raise doubts as to whether or not the knee to the neck was the cause of death. If it wasn't, then the whole issue of brutality comes into question.
Likewise if all a person sees is a seemingly unarmed man walking to his car and police shooting him in the back multiple times, it's logical to conclude it was an unjustified act. However when you add in additional facts, such as the man claiming to have a knife, ignoring police demands to not approach the car door, and that there was a knife found on the floor where he was reaching, the initial conclusion of a "bad shoot" can become questionable.
Other details, such as the victim having a warrant out for rape, or that police being called to the scene because the victim was said to have digitally penetrated his fiance/ex-girlfriend without consent and then stole her car and money, it adds some color to the whole situation that is absent when all that is reported is that when the police arrived, he was trying to break up a fight. Such details might dissuade people from glorifying the victim as some sort of martyr and using it as an excuse to damage private and public property and potentially harm others out of an emotional reaction.
It's why the facts of the case are necessary and why people shouldn't jump to conclusions (like protesting or rioting) before the facts come in to play. It's also why we have a judicial system that allows all sides to tell their stories rather than having guilt or innocence judged by public opinion.
It would seem to follow that the officer's knee on the back of a man's neck would cause him to suffocate to death if all you went on was the video footage, especially when that man was saying he couldn't breathe. However, if you add in to the equation that the man was claiming he couldn't breathe prior to anyone kneeling on him and that he had a lethal dose of drugs in his system that typically cause breathing problems, it can raise doubts as to whether or not the knee to the neck was the cause of death. If it wasn't, then the whole issue of brutality comes into question.
Likewise if all a person sees is a seemingly unarmed man walking to his car and police shooting him in the back multiple times, it's logical to conclude it was an unjustified act. However when you add in additional facts, such as the man claiming to have a knife, ignoring police demands to not approach the car door, and that there was a knife found on the floor where he was reaching, the initial conclusion of a "bad shoot" can become questionable.
Other details, such as the victim having a warrant out for rape, or that police being called to the scene because the victim was said to have digitally penetrated his fiance/ex-girlfriend without consent and then stole her car and money, it adds some color to the whole situation that is absent when all that is reported is that when the police arrived, he was trying to break up a fight. Such details might dissuade people from glorifying the victim as some sort of martyr and using it as an excuse to damage private and public property and potentially harm others out of an emotional reaction.
It's why the facts of the case are necessary and why people shouldn't jump to conclusions (like protesting or rioting) before the facts come in to play. It's also why we have a judicial system that allows all sides to tell their stories rather than having guilt or innocence judged by public opinion.
Posted on 9/12/20 at 8:31 am to FooManChoo
quote:
seemingly unarmed man walking to his car and police shooting him in the back multiple times, it's logical to conclude it was an unjustified act
If I had done that overseas, I would have been UCMJ’d for murder. It’s crazy that we hold our police to a lower standard than our service members. Police offers have an incredibly difficult, and frequently dangerous job. They are also public servants. They cannot protect and serve the public, however, if their first instinct is to discharge their entire magazine at the first scent of fear.
This post was edited on 9/12/20 at 8:34 am
Posted on 9/12/20 at 9:06 am to baconwaffle
quote:
I could go vigilante and take out Jeffrey Dahmer and yet I would still be charged with first degree murder. It’s because as a society, we don’t tolerate vigilantism in the same way we do not tolerate police brutality, even if the victim probably deserved it.
Bacon and Foo making a lot of sense here.
Posted on 9/12/20 at 9:16 am to baconwaffle
quote:
If I had done that overseas, I would have been UCMJ’d for murder
Military police called to arrest a man with a warrant who was just accused of breaking the law again would be court martialed? Even when the alleged perp resisted arrest, fought off 2 MPs with a knife and was reaching into a vehicle despite commands to stop?
Look. I get it. The situation should be investigated. The situation should follow the evidence. The officers arent in the clear until there is a full review of the facts. But damn. There are a lot of facts on video. There are a lot of facts in the police communications (both with the victim and back to the officers).
Posted on 9/12/20 at 9:28 am to baconwaffle
quote:I forgot to add that the victim told the officers he had a knife before he approached the driver’s side door, the officers used tasers against him first (but they didn’t work), he resisted arrest, and leaned into the car (where they later found a knife) against the warnings of the officers before they shot him.
If I had done that overseas, I would have been UCMJ’d for murder. It’s crazy that we hold our police to a lower standard than our service members. Police offers have an incredibly difficult, and frequently dangerous job. They are also public servants. They cannot protect and serve the public, however, if their first instinct is to discharge their entire magazine at the first scent of fear.
So the officers warned a man resisting arrest and tried non-lethal force to stop him before using lethal force against him when he was apparently reaching for a deadly weapon that he already said he had.
Those are details that are absent the cell phone footage as I recall. Do you think it should be a slam dunk murder charge, assuming those details are factual?
Page 8 of 11
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News