# 2 NYPD executed, de Blasio should go?



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

You can read the account in many places, I just chose the first link that came up with google.

http://nypost.com/2014/12/20/2-nypd-cops-shot-execution-style-in-brooklyn/

Gunman shot himself. He had instagram'd several things today, after shooting his girlfriend, that clearly indicate he wanted to kill cops for Brown and Garner.

Whether you trust LEO or not, it's awful. 

Many are saying de Blasio should step down immediately as he has been about as useful as Sharpton for race issues, and has contributed to the level of passion for the racial problems for NY police. 

NY cops turned their backs to de Blasio as he entered for the news conference with police chief. 

This murderer guy was a nut, regardless of how poorly de Blasio has handled the problems, and could have done this if Giuliani was mayor. But fact remains, mayor is getting major blowback for his recent failures, as he should. He's an idiot.

I am wondering what those people feel like right now, who were shouting "what do we want.. dead cops.. " Might be odd to realize how you sound if you happened to be near the street to see the bodies for real getting cleaned up, etc.


----------



## fixitguy (Nov 2, 2010)

Strange times we live in. (sorry same pic, as in your link. I should have opened that first)


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

fixitguy said:


> I found this on a 4x4 forum I'm on. Strange times we live in.


Yep, that's the guy. I'm not familiar enough with instagram to know what the icons and stuff mean exactly, but interesting it has 110 likes at the time someone captured that. Liking a pic of a gun is one thing. But liking the comments he put is another, ya know?

Geez. Sick.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

partndn said:


> This murderer guy was a nut, regardless of how poorly de Blasio has handled the problems, and could have done this if Giuliani was mayor.


If Giuliani was mayor, the protests would have been under control, he would not have given Sharpton a platform to attack the police, he likely would have pushed back against Obama and Holder, and he would have supported the police. When 2 police were assaulted last week, he would have publicly supported the police and made sure the criminals were arrested.

The protests in NY have been orchestrated by unions, Occupy Wall Street, communists, etc. In other words, the coalition that got de Blasio elected. Under Giuliani, those groups wouldn't have had much, if any, power.

And the guy may or may not be a nut, but he does seem to have a gang connection and possibly a connection to Islam (his facebook page quotes from the Quran).


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

I agree with everything you said Moon


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

My heart breaks for their families. I just attended an LEO burial last week (line of duty), it was the most heartbreaking thing I've ever seen.

I just was not prepared for the 'last call'. Gut wrenching just doesn't describe it.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

MoonRiver said:


> If Giuliani was mayor, the protests would have been under control, he would not have given Sharpton a platform to attack the police, he likely would have pushed back against Obama and Holder, and he would have supported the police. When 2 police were assaulted last week, he would have publicly supported the police and made sure the criminals were arrested.
> 
> The protests in NY have been orchestrated by unions, Occupy Wall Street, communists, etc. In other words, the coalition that got de Blasio elected. Under Giuliani, those groups wouldn't have had much, if any, power.
> 
> And the guy may or may not be a nut, but he does seem to have a gang connection and possibly a connection to Islam (his facebook page quotes from the Quran).


I would include Sharpton, Holder and Obama............ 
My guess is Holder and Obama are giving Sharpton support for his actions.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

po boy said:


> I would include Sharpton, Holder and Obama............
> My guess is *Holder and Obama are giving Sharpton support* for his actions.


It ain't a guess. It is a fact.


----------



## CraterCove (Jan 24, 2011)

Why do people keep saying this is a race issue? 

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_23701326/mom-man-down-syndrome-talks-about-his-death

There are many, many people, unarmed and not even accused or implicated in crimes killed by LEO's each year. It's about the fact that the police protect their bad guys instead of forcing them out into the light.

Anyone remember this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/01/oscar-grant-lawsuit-bart-officer_n_5548719.html

Now I've watched the videos of that one... I don't believe that the LEO involved intentionally killed the man. If you look up the vids (too much cursing to link here) You can see he's about as shocked as anyone else there. But he should never be a cop again. 

People should not lose their lives over non violent crimes. People can not be expected to simply capitulate when they are scared for their lives, it's natural to resist. But if you do that then maybe you'll get shot when the cop involved reaches for his tazer and accidentally draws his gun instead. 

Good cops are being killed now and put into more harm than necessary because bad cops get protected and race baiters are allowed to incite violence on behalf of scum. When Eric Garner's untimely death is the one that should be troubling to all of us. People getting shot when a family calls for an ambulance for a diabetic loved one, or dying because they couldn't figure out how to buy another movie ticket while being stressed are a problem for all of us, good cops and citizens.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> If Giuliani was mayor, the protests would have been under control, he would not have given Sharpton a platform to attack the police, he likely would have pushed back against Obama and Holder, and he would have supported the police. When 2 police were assaulted last week, he would have publicly supported the police and made sure the criminals were arrested.
> 
> The protests in NY have been orchestrated by unions, Occupy Wall Street, communists, etc. In other words, the coalition that got de Blasio elected. Under Giuliani, those groups wouldn't have had much, if any, power.
> 
> And the guy may or may not be a nut, but he does seem to have a gang connection and possibly a connection to Islam (his facebook page quotes from the Quran).


Post of the decade award.

I'm sick of this liberal carp.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

po boy said:


> I would include Sharpton, Holder and Obama............
> My guess is Holder and Obama are giving Sharpton support for his actions.


That's not a guess, po. How many times has Sharpton been hugged at the WH???


----------



## FarmerKat (Jul 3, 2014)

Unfortunately, I suspect that many in our country are happy and celebrating the executions today. Just like many in the Middle East were celebrating after 9/11. Sick world we live in.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Pretty good article. Incase some don't understand...

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ke...il_job=1600438_12202014&s=al&dkt_nbr=ztwgppwg

"This guy's intent &#8212; based on that Instagram post &#8212; was retribution for Eric Garner and Michael Brown," he told Newsmax. "The people who encouraged these protests &#8212; you had peaceful protesters who were screaming 'kill the cops' &#8212; the so-called peaceful protesters.

"Who was encouraging these protesters? De Blasio, Sharpton and other elected officials and community leaders. They encouraged this mentality. They encouraged this behavior.


----------



## scooter (Mar 31, 2008)

I knew that there would be open season on police while watching that crowd of protester's marching and chanting, "What do we want? Dead cops." It was a group that had been organized by the group that Sharpton organizes.

*&#8230;FLASHBACK: Protesters Chant &#8216;What Do We Want? Dead Cops!&#8217;&#8230;*

by Warner Todd Huston


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

You would be hard pressed to find a single person on this forum that did not know there were going to be cop killings such as these because of the emotionally genned up zombies.

de Blasio knew too. And so did BO and his gang of perverts. They don't care because their people are the zombie hoard.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

FarmerKat said:


> Unfortunately, I suspect that many in our country are happy and celebrating the executions today. Just like many in the Middle East were celebrating after 9/11. Sick world we live in.


There were people right there that were cheering and celebrating the murders. What a twisted world.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

And The Obamas are at the Head of The Class on this one.
This valet and help in what was Target thing was such a insult and racist remark THEY are doing more harm in this country to set back the black and white issue a 100 YEARS~!

Instead of saying LOOK I am black and LOOK what I accomplished and being POSITIVE "I am the President ofd the USA and So Can You be". He has to be this negative person that is feeding this carp.
But nope Play that Stupid Race Card and THIS is the results, shooting NO Executing the Good Officers as they ate their lunch. ow sick.
Now even in MN this stupid act of racist is now affecting 1,000s and Mall of America.
And Obamas Just Sit there and Laugh.
They are no good for this country from the start and they are getting worse, and things are getting worse in this country.
This race Card for the past few years always was over played and now it is being used for every cotton picking thing these blacks can come up with. And blaming everything on LEO is always being over done a LOT also. Sure there are bad ones but now the MEDIA is having a feeding frenzy on each and every story that they can Just Get out and Print only THEIR side of things so it MAKES the LEOs in this ALL look bad. 
Stupidity is running rampant in this country right now.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

And it's intentional.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

When you start a fire, there is a process.
You start with tinder, you provide a spark, then you add fuel and oxygen to make it a roaring fire.
Those with eyes and wisdom will see the analogy.
This fire didn't start without the help of all the components. There is plenty of "blame" to go around. Leave out just one of the components and the fire doesn't happen.


----------



## mzgarden (Mar 16, 2012)

I agree. I just said this morning to DH -- I sure hope DeBlasio, Sharpton and Obama didn't think once they started this fire, they'd be able to control it to their purposes. This reminds me of the campfire that people get going so high, laughing and throwing pallet on top of pallet until - whoosh, it's gotten beyond their control and they get burned along with everyone else. Stand back - this could be more than even they bargained for. I truly hope not but it's scary to watch.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Obama, Sharpton, De Blasio et al are the fuel and oxygen.
The belligerence between the cops and the black community were the tinder.
The spark was the refusal of the grand jury to indict the cops that used a chokehold that was banned 20 years ago in a petty crime arrest.

It takes all 3.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Any Boy Scout can tell you how to start a good fire.
What we NEED is people with wisdom (I can't emphasize this word enough) to put it out.
Remember, you also need to eliminate the 3 components to prevent a future fire.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

farmrbrown said:


> Any Boy Scout can tell you how to start a good fire.
> What we NEED is people with wisdom (I can't emphasize this word enough) to put it out.
> Remember, you also need to eliminate the 3 components to prevent a future fire.


Actually you only need to remove one.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Member of Black Guerrilla Family; Philosophy and Goals:
Inspired by Marcus Garvey, the Black Guerilla Family was characterized as an ideological African-American Marxist revolutionary organization composed of prisoners. It was founded with the stated goals of eradicating racism, maintaining dignity in prison, and overthrowing the United States government.


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

DeBlasio, obama, holder, sharpton, and all the other grievance mongers reinforcing the paranoia in the black community give credence to the us vs them mentality. Until someone with real stature among blacks stands up and says "be honest with yourselves, who is the real threat in this community, who's killing our young men every day? What would your lives really be like if the police just quit protecting you?" Nothing is going to change.

Unfortunately, the people who could make those statements have no interest in doing so. It's not in their financial or political interests to end tensions between the races. They're truly traitors to their race.

I wouldn't blame the NYPD if they went on strike, demanding de blasio's resignation. Let the people calling for dead cops find out what life is like without them.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

bowdonkey said:


> Actually you only need to remove one.


We have TWO LONG YEARS to go before One Of them is gone~!!!!!


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly.

The title for Suran 8 is &#8220;Al-Anfal,&#8221; &#8220;The Spoils of War.&#8221; A segment of this same verse is used by the Muslim Brotherhood in their logo directly beneath the two swords, &#8220;And make ready&#8230;&#8221;:
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/12/2...ic-verse-and-strike-terror-into-their-hearts/


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

bowdonkey said:


> Actually you only need to remove one.


I figured someone would say that.
That's why I put enormous emphasis on the word "wisdom".

If you only remove one, it's easy to get it started again by adding the missing element.
If you remove all 3, the odds of getting all 3 back to start the fire is dramatically reduced.


Leave tinder and fuel around and you only need a spark.
Leave tinder and a spark and you only need fuel.
Leave spark and fuel and you only need some tinder.

A wise Boy Scout knows it's best to eliminate all 3 if you don't want a fire again real soon.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I can not and will not condone what has happened here, BUT, is anyone surprised?

For too long we've been becoming police state, and are being taxed and legislated into poverty and suppression.

We picked up arms to fight the British for less, and we were handed the second amendment to over come tyrants... Are tyrants not stepping over their boundaries any more? Is the will of the people being supported by the government? 

It's only a matter of time before either those in power get it, and start giving the plebes some breathing room, or more people are going to start dying at the hands of those that are fed up and believe heavily in the second amendment.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

We live in a country that celebrates mindless, selfish violence. We do this in music, movies and writing. If the police are violent, they only reflect the violence offered by the general population. 
Yes, innocent people get killed by police but many, many more get killed by the people the police try to stop. 
Here locally a deputy killed a 17 year old who attacked him with a machete after wrecking his car at 1 am. I read the comments on the news story after it ended up on Yahoo. It was full of nasties saying the cop probably was attacked because this kid was trying to defend himself. Yeah right - innocent, sober 17 year olds always are carrying machetes to defend themselves after car accidents. It took two civilians to assist another cop to get handcuffs on the shot man, who meanwhile stripped himself naked, 10 minutes after the injuried cop did not execute him but had locked himself in his car to wait for help.
And many morons could still write without embarassment about the cop deserving it. The ugliness of a country where people have come to believe that meth abuse is a Constitutional human right and those who try to contain the resulting mayhem are evil, that the criminals of the world are actually heros, that a citizen has the right to casually break any law that he chooses with impunity has spread to attack all from cradle to grave.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

This is a good listen by Paul Harvey

[YOUTUBE] ?v=zDA3ck9b4to[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## BlackFeather (Jun 17, 2014)

Lets look at how the police are going to think, who can they trust? When is just what appears to be an ordinary citizen going to turn around and shoot you? They are already being indoctrinated by the government that people who believe in the constitution could be a threat, indoctrinated that Christians could be a threat, So now the police can be made to think the general public could be a threat. This will bode ill for all involved. More fear from the police and more fear of the police, and it is sad to say but no one is going to try and defuse the situation. I still see civil war or revolution coming and it needs to be stopped.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

BlackFeather said:


> I still see civil war or revolution coming and it needs to be stopped.


Can you imagine what things would be like now if they would have said that back in the mid 1700's?

I'd hate to see fighting within our country, but the rich and power have been waging a war against us commoners for a long time... Seems people are getting fed up with it..


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

This is just a rehash of the 60's, and Obama is no help at all and has been more of a hindrance. This is not a rich vs poor it is Black power that has now got a hero our president that has fueled this up into a feeding frenzy 
You can still make it in this country but you have to have the fortitude and DRIVE to get it done. And this president has taken that drive away. This is not a 1%er of which is so dumb in the first place to even think that way. Even Millionaires FAIL each year and so do Billionaires. And who takes their place OTHERS that have climbed that Ladder of success.


----------



## CraterCove (Jan 24, 2011)

There should always be a zero tolerance of mistakes in professions that hold authority. Period. Just because well, more guilty people get killed than innocents... does not mean that it should in any way be tolerated. That's what sheep say when the lgd goes bad.. well he killed more wolves than us.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

CraterCove said:


> There should always be a zero tolerance of mistakes in professions that hold authority. Period. Just because well, more guilty people get killed than innocents... does not mean that it should in any way be tolerated. That's what sheep say when the lgd goes bad.. well he killed more wolves than us.


Yeah- right, sure. Find the one perfect human being and pursuade him to be a cop. 

And then make sure the world never ever hands him a situation where he can't sit down and think it through for an hour or two.

And then give him skin like leather to deflect the criticisms of the arm chair quarterbacks who blame him no matter what he does. 

I do believe there are cops who abuse people but the mindless masses who are ever ready to follow the herd and scream violence without having a clue- well, they are just as sheeple as anyone else. They are just as much running in the same direction as the rest of flock. A flock running in a different direction is just as much a flock running the opposite way.


----------



## CraterCove (Jan 24, 2011)

All I see there are excuses why it's okay. ~shrug~ No one said anyone was perfect. But that's never an excuse to accept poor judgement and poor reaction in someone who holds the life and death stick in their hands.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

CraterCove said:


> All I see there are excuses why it's okay. ~shrug~ No one said anyone was perfect. But that's never an excuse to accept poor judgement and poor reaction in someone who holds the life and death stick in their hands.


But isn't that the very definition of not perfect?


----------



## CraterCove (Jan 24, 2011)

No. It's not.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

CraterCove said:


> No. It's not.


Well since it appears to me that no mistakes means perfect, you need to explain what you mean by that.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

The absolute mental blocks in all of this puzzles me in how people think.:huh:

No one is asking for perfection, nor SHOULD they be.
But I think it's only fair to ask that when a transgression occurs, the punishment should fit the crime and it shouldn't matter who that person is.

If you believe that you should be arrested, even if it's a petty crime, then accept the punishment.
If you believe that some muscle and non lethal force should be used when you resist arrest, assuming the resister isn't a lethal threat, then accept that punishment.
If you believe that accidentally killing someone using a banned method while arresting them is negligent homicide, then accept that punishment.
If you believe shooting random police is premeditated murder, then accept that punishment.

Look, you have to be consistent.
We have to train our children to be good citizens and we have to train our judges, lawyers and cops to exercise the law well.
It's not about perfection, it's about correcting the small mistakes before they become really big ones.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)




----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

farmrbrown said:


> The absolute mental blocks in all of this puzzles me in how people think.:huh:
> 
> No one is asking for perfection, nor SHOULD they be.
> But I think it's only fair to ask that when a transgression occurs, the punishment should fit the crime and it shouldn't matter who that person is.
> ...


I believe that making those decisions can not be done based on a news article. In any direction. And that to exercise your prejudices by screaming on forums without discretion drives out all chance of improving anything. It simply drives people into opposing camps.

No, it is not so simple as that to determine what even happened, much less whether that means blame. And it begs the next question- so what is to be done with law breakers who do not believe they should be arrested? What if they have no intention of passively going along to jail, what if they ignore every ticket and then still won't either pay when threatened with arrest? What if victims can get no relief from criminals who resist getting dragged off to jail and, because they can not be forced because they might get injured in the arrest, just walk off? 


Either we'll eliminate the laws so the arrest is not needed and we agree to live with the resulting problems that no law leaves or we enforce them in ways that can be ugly. That is the only simplicity involved. And then the details of that get complicated too.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

where I want to said:


> I believe that making those decisions can not be done based on a news article. In any direction. And that to exercise your prejudices by screaming on forums without discretion drives out all chance of improving anything. It simply drives people into opposing camps.



I believe I was basing it on the NY medical examiner's statement, not solely on news reports......

http://time.com/3071288/eric-garner-chokehold-death-nypd-medical-examiner/
New York City&#8217;s Chief Medical Examiner said Friday that Eric Garner, the Staten Island man whose death during a police arrest last month sparked charges of excessive force, died from a chokehold while he was in custody for allegedly selling untaxed cigarettes. The incident has been ruled a homicide.

Medical examiner spokeswoman Julie Bolcer said that the death was caused by &#8220;compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police,&#8221; and that asthma and heart disease also played a role.








where I want to said:


> No, it is not so simple as that to determine what even happened, much less whether that means blame. And it begs the next question- so what is to be done with law breakers who do not believe they should be arrested? What if they have no intention of passively going along to jail, what if they ignore every ticket and then still won't either pay when threatened with arrest? What if victims can get no relief from criminals who resist getting dragged off to jail and, because they can not be forced because they might get injured in the arrest, just walk off?
> 
> 
> Either we'll eliminate the laws so the arrest is not needed and we agree to live with the resulting problems that no law leaves or we enforce them in ways that can be ugly. That is the only simplicity involved. And then the details of that get complicated too.


I believe I already answered that in my quoted post...........







farmrbrown said:


> If you believe that you should be arrested, even if it's a petty crime, then accept the punishment.
> *If you believe that some muscle and non lethal force should be used when you resist arrest, assuming the resister isn't a lethal threat*, then accept that punishment.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

farmrbrown said:


> I believe I was basing it on the NY medical examiner's statement, not solely on news reports......
> 
> http://time.com/3071288/eric-garner-chokehold-death-nypd-medical-examiner/
> New York Cityâs Chief Medical Examiner said Friday that Eric Garner, the Staten Island man whose death during a police arrest last month sparked charges of excessive force, died from a chokehold while he was in custody for allegedly selling untaxed cigarettes. The incident has been ruled a homicide.
> ...


No that does not answer the question at all. It assumes there are ways to conduct an arrest that will never result in injury or death in anyone who simply refuses to cooperate. If there are, then it would be good of the people who say this is the duty of every policeman to tell me how. 

The hold on the man did result in this death, along with the weight of the himself and the police on him. But not all homicides are crimes. So that does not mean a crime was committed. That was the purpose of the grand jury- to decide that. 

As for the choke hold- the policeman said he did not use that but something similar that is permitted. That does not mean that it should be if it results in the same injuries. But assuming that the grand jury did it's job, then they should have addressed this too.

But the bottom line is very similar to the same issue in wars. It is possible to get the job done with restrictions that are supposed to protect the enemy at the same time? Can you really conduct an arrest without unintentional damage? If so, how?


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

where I want to said:


> No that does not answer the question at all. It assumes there are ways to conduct an arrest that will never result in injury or death in anyone who simply refuses to cooperate. If there are, then it would be good of the people who say this is the duty of every policeman to tell me how.
> 
> The hold on the man did result in this death, along with the weight of the himself and the police on him. But not all homicides are crimes. So that does not mean a crime was committed. That was the purpose of the grand jury- to decide that.
> 
> ...



Ah, I think I see what I wasn't 100% clear about.....I'll add a word or two and see if it makes more sense.




farmrbrown said:


> If you believe that you should be arrested, even if it's a petty crime, then accept the punishment.
> 
> If you believe that some muscle and non lethal force should be used when you resist arrest and by consequence the one being arrested will get bumps and bruises, assuming the resister isn't a lethal threat, then accept that punishment resisting that arrest.



I didn't mean to imply that force should never be used and the cop should be punished for using it, just the opposite.
If you decide to resist, even though you're not a threat, don't complain if you get tazed or scraped up in a take down, that is your punishment for resisting.
Likewise, if I were to kill someone accidentally doing something I know was wrong or unnecessary, I'd face a charge of manslaughter, negligent homicide or something similar.

Now, if you want to believe it wasn't a chokehold, but something really close to it and that makes a difference in the cop's negligence - OK.
It is at that point that people start to doubt about the law's value of a human life.
Yes, it was an accident, but a death sentence for selling bootleg cigarettes is a little harsh in my book.
The cop could at the very least say he was sorry and perhaps even wrong for going that far.
Opinions vary I guess.
My dad always said it takes a big man to admit his mistakes.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

And his shortness of breath was caused by his Asthma AND being very over weight with other medical problems as well.
But the bottom line here is don't want a so called choke hold being applied to ya. Don't do the crime. LOL


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

One of the takeaways that I wish would come from this is that legislators would take responsibility for the effect of their laws, including enforcement and/or lack of it, and pass few of them recognizing they have already created an atmosphere of lawlessness.
But then also have backbone to enforce those that exist no matter what sob stories the enforcement generate.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

farmrbrown said:


> Now, if you want to believe it wasn't a chokehold, but something really close to it and that makes a difference in the cop's negligence - OK.
> It is at that point that people start to doubt about the law's value of a human life.
> Yes, it was an accident, but a death sentence for selling bootleg cigarettes is a little harsh in my book.
> The cop could at the very least say he was sorry and perhaps even wrong for going that far.
> ...


I have no idea whether the policeman was criminally negligent from the information I possess. Therefore I am forced to accept the grand jury's decision unless there is evidence of their wrong doing.

I am pretty certain that the policeman did not intend death for this man and would have acted differently if he know that there was even a good chance of it being true. I also admit I do not know whether it was forseeable or not. I know that things happen that are bad and for which I am responsible but also know that it is not reasonable to expect that I should have had enough information for the result to be clear.

I do know that this man did not die because he was selling illegal cigarettes. He died because he physically refused to be arrested. The police are not there to pass sentences, although I suspect that being human, a few can't resist trying to fix the miseries of the world that way. It would be one of those things that I could sympathize with but still not allow to get a pass as no one man's judgement is so clear as to be right. But that is certainly not the case in this.

I can't help wondering if the huge and uncritical sympathy for people whose behavior is questionable at best shows the rising power of a population of criminals and if we are heading into a world like that of Sicily, where the violent run everything.


----------



## CraterCove (Jan 24, 2011)

arabian knight said:


> And his shortness of breath was caused by his Asthma AND being very over weight with other medical problems as well.
> But the bottom line here is don't want a so called choke hold being applied to ya. Don't do the crime. LOL


I'm just going to stick to my guns here about non-violent crimes not being pursued violently and let that lay. Selling cigarettes singly without kicking up the proper taxes is no reason to get dead, or even just a broken wrist, nay even a bruised wrist.

To my mind, part of the problem are laws put in by well meaning or greedy people with a complete disconnect about the consequences. Any time you task law enforcement with a law to enforce you are tacitly agreeing to allow them to do anything to the person who supposedly committed said crimes including beat them and put them in a cell or murder them. Think about that next time you start to think "There oughta be a law".


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

arabian knight said:


> And his shortness of breath was caused by his Asthma AND being very over weight with other medical problems as well.
> But the bottom line here is don't want a so called choke hold being applied to ya. Don't do the crime. LOL


I'm not sure whether to call that "tinder, spark or fuel", but that's a good example of one of the contributing attitudes in this mess.

I'll put myself in a bad situation:

A kid is stealing out of my garden and I catch him red handed. I try to hold him until the cops get there. Unfortunately as we struggle, I get him in a choke hold and he stops breathing.
Do ya think that the law is just going to let that slide?
After all I just killed him, although I didn't mean to, and for what?
Stealing some fruits and vegetables?
I may or may not face charges but I would be surprised if I didn't.







where I want to said:


> I have no idea whether the policeman was criminally negligent from the information I possess. Therefore I am forced to accept the grand jury's decision unless there is evidence of their wrong doing.
> 
> I am pretty certain that the policeman did not intend death for this man and would have acted differently if he know that there was even a good chance of it being true. I also admit I do not know whether it was forseeable or not. I know that things happen that are bad and for which I am responsible but also know that it is not reasonable to expect that I should have had enough information for the result to be clear.
> 
> ...



Well, a little legal research on the choke hold ban would make a difference in your indecisiveness, or at least it should.
It started in L.A. after several deaths and lawsuits, NYC followed suit in the mid 1980's.
Then in 1994 police commissioner Kelley further restricted its use to an outright ban.
That's where the negligence comes into play. The cops already knew for 20 years that doing it could result in an unnecessary death and being prosecuted either in criminal or civil court.
Even if you didn't mean for a death to happen, if you are doing something you've been told not to do, that's the legal threshold for a negligent homicide charge.



where I want to said:


> One of the takeaways that I wish would come from this is that legislators would take responsibility for the effect of their laws, including enforcement and/or lack of it, and pass few of them recognizing they have already created an atmosphere of lawlessness.
> But then also have backbone to enforce those that exist no matter what sob stories the enforcement generate.


Very true. Also passing laws for triviality that call for arresting someone should be considered.
When LEO's are needed for dangerous situations, why would you want them to use their authority for a "crime" that doesn't hurt anyone.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

farmrbrown said:


> I'm not sure whether to call that "tinder, spark or fuel", but that's a good example of one of the contributing attitudes in this mess.
> 
> I'll put myself in a bad situation:
> 
> ...


In the instance of the garden, your authority does not extend to arresting someone and the policeman's does. So it is not a reasonable comparison.
Second, there is reason for examining the need for things resembling a chokehold as they can lead to bad results. That does not mean the policeman in this case was doing something illegal, which is your assumption from which all other statements derive. The grand jury did not find it that clear and I would believe they had a lot more in formation. Doesn't mean it is an acceptable practice but there obviously was room to question. I am not indecisive- just not in a position to make a decision. 
And lastly, there is no such thing as a victimless crime. The store owners who were forced by NYC politicians and social good lobbyists to tax so heavily obviously felt victimed by the deceased's behavior. Not that they would have chosen his death as a solution. But again what is your solution for achieving arrest for crimes without having a possibility of death ot injury? I would hope you would consider the policeman's life in this solution besides the criminals.
Then there can be a debate about it's relative merits.
As it is the only thing that is being said is that it shouldn't happen, which is not at all useful to fixing it.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I think many people are missing something here.. 

Our government has been training people to kill, then sending them off to kill people in perpetual wars under the guise of "keeping us safe"... 

Then they get back to the US and start looking for a job, and the police departments are snatching them up as fast as they can... 

Is it any wonder we have the problems we have, and is it any wonder the powerful are using these people to further their agenda?


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

where I want to said:


> In the instance of the garden, your authority does not extend to arresting someone and the policeman's does. So it is not a reasonable comparison.



Surely you jest, even Gomer Pyle knew about citizen's arrest......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen's_arrest_in_the_United_States



where I want to said:


> Second, there is reason for examining the need for things resembling a chokehold as they can lead to bad results. *That does not mean the policeman in this case was doing something illegal, which is your assumption from which all other statements derive.* The grand jury did not find it that clear and I would believe they had a lot more in formation. Doesn't mean it is an acceptable practice but there obviously was room to question. I am not indecisive- just not in a position to make a decision.


Please note that I never said it was illegal.
I said it was banned by departmental policy and he knew better than to use it.
IOW, it wasn't illegal, just wrong.
That may have been the tipping point of the grand jury's decision.

It is precisely why I used the example that I did. 
It may not have been illegal to use the chokehold, but by having more authority the officer also has more responsibility.
If I can reasonably expect to be charged in my example, how much greater would the expectation be for a person with more authority and responsibility to be charged?

I say this because my wife and her family are either LEO's or former LEO's.
They were taught in standards about the use and escalation of force. You can use one step above the force you are met with, no more.




where I want to said:


> And lastly, there is no such thing as a victimless crime. The store owners who were forced by NYC politicians and social good lobbyists to tax so heavily obviously felt victimed by the deceased's behavior. Not that they would have chosen his death as a solution. * But again what is your solution for achieving arrest for crimes without having a possibility of death ot injury?* I would hope you would consider the policeman's life in this solution besides the criminals.
> Then there can be a debate about it's relative merits.
> As it is the only thing that is being said is that it shouldn't happen, which is not at all useful to fixing it.


Once again, I have to point out that I can't answer that because I've already said 3 times that is not my position.


It's rather obvious that the position of some is either 100% blame or 0%, with no room for admitting error on both sides.
That is when you see senseless tragedies like the ones that happened today.:awh:


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

farmrbrown said:


> It's rather obvious that the position of some is either 100% blame or 0%, with no room for admitting error on both sides.
> That is when you see senseless tragedies like the ones that happened today.:awh:


No it isn;t it is a bunch of spoiled brats that are now finding ANY excuse to KILL COPS. That is it There is NO Motive at all. The NY Officer is Over and down with Move On. 
But now these senseless brainless hoodlums find anyway they can to Kill The Man, and just USE this NY incident as their mantra to do as much harm as they can Cause They Can. And some of thee gain and hoodlums are the SAME ones that acted like nut-cases during their FAILED attempt at whatever wall-street nonsenses they can pull off now.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

It isn't a senseless tragedy to kill innocent cops?

I think you confused two entirely different events.
As far as there being no motive, the killer put it in writing all over the internet several times before he did it, even naming Brown and Garner in his post.

I will NOT defend the murder of the two NYPD......and I will NOT defend choking a man to death for mildly resisting arrest for a petty crime of selling loose cigarettes.

Would you?
How is that not wrong?

I'm reminded of the old adage, "Two wrongs don't make a right" and it would certainly apply in this instance.
However, for that discussion to take place, don't you first have to admit what was the "wrong"?


----------



## TriWinkle (Oct 2, 2011)

arabian knight said:


> And his shortness of breath was caused by his Asthma AND being very over weight with other medical problems as well.
> *But the bottom line here is don't want a so called choke hold being applied to ya. Don't do the crime. *LOL



Who said he was guilty of a crime? I thought we still went by "innocent until proven guilty"? Did you see him commit the crime? I saw a cop swinging off his throat in that video, but I didn't see this crime the man is supposed to have committed.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

TriWinkle said:


> Who said he was guilty of a crime? I thought we still went by "innocent until proven guilty"? Did you see him commit the crime? I saw a cop swinging off his throat in that video, but I didn't see this crime the man is supposed to have committed.


So your not seeing means that no crime occurred?


----------



## TriWinkle (Oct 2, 2011)

where I want to said:


> So your not seeing means that no crime occurred?


So the crime you "witnessed" was worthy of a death sentence?

And unless there's proof and conviction by trial, the man was innocent. Sorry, but that's the way the system your defending so wholeheartedly works.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

where I want to said:


> So your not seeing means that no crime occurred?


Ya really. When was resisting arrest not a crime, forget what happened before that. steeling and the dude had a rap sheet a mile long. It was just a unfortunate set of circumstances that led to his heart giving out, 350 pounds, advanced diabetes, asthma which really cause his shortness of breath and later resulted in his death besides all thos other things on top of this.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

TriWinkle said:


> So the crime you "witnessed" was worthy of a death sentence?
> 
> And unless there's proof and conviction by trial, the man was innocent. Sorry, but that's the way the system your defending so wholeheartedly works.


Nope- the system doesn't work at all like that.

That's like saying flying caused the death of the jumper whose parachute didn't open. Although if he didn't fly, he wouldn't have died, it is also true that most people who fly do not die. The vast majority of people flying do not die. It's the jumping from the plane that increases the risk. The vast majority of people arrested do not die. Their chances of injury are increased astronomically by resistence to the arrest.

So to say a person who refuses to be arrested must be considered innocent and therefore the police can not force his arrest lest he be harmed for being innocent is misapply the concept in the most basic way. No one would ever have to stand trial if all they had to do was say " don't touch me" to avoid arrest.

In fact you did see the deceased engaging in a crime if you watched the video as you claim. You watched him resisting arrest, which is a seperate crime from the one the police attempted to arrest him .


----------



## TriWinkle (Oct 2, 2011)

Resisting arrest? Arguing it perhaps, but if this "dangerous" 350 lb man was "resisting" those cops don't seem to be in that rough of shape. I'm sure it was their awesome police training that allowed them to kill a man without evidence of harm to themselves, right? Maybe they were bleeding on the inside?

You people amaze me...I'd bet money you and your partner (the one with the fondness for small horses) are diehard conservatives...which are normally against government involvement in peoples' lives...However, tolerance/acceptance for cops and the way that they victimize people are ignored, and in come cases, encouraged.

Your basic argument is that they have a tough job, therefore, allowances should be made and accountability should be minimum.

Now Liberals (fans of big government) are out on the streets marching, protesting and basically making headlines protesting a problem that's been occurring for decades, and suddenly Conservatives (anti-gov) become benevolent towards all things government related.

Again, I have to wonder if this isn't why nothing in this country ever changes.

Is this a partisan thing with y'all? If the Liberals are against it, you should be for it? If they're for it, you should be against it? Are you identifying with the cops, but not their victims?
"Oh well, I have a brother/father/sister/uncle/cousin/husband who is a cop and he would **never** do that!!"

Funny, the father of a sheriff was assaulted recently for simply trying to inform a patrolman that his son (his other son) was autistic, during a traffic stop...I wonder how the sheriff felt about the treatment of his father...

But lets just go with this theory...You've done nothing wrong...Men in uniform walk up to you. Surround you. Restrict your freedom, search you, escort you away to a facility of their choosing, fingerprint you, strip search you and throw you in a cell with other people, who may have actually committed violent crimes, simply because they have the power to do so...You have to hire a lawyer to defend yourself, if you can afford one, if you can't good luck with the dog and pony show they call public defenders who usually encourage you to plead out to avoid a larger charge...you're sitting here telling me, that's an acceptable scenario to you?

You say nothing, you don't try to explain, you don't give voice to your frustration over the situation (which got this man killed), you just meekly go along to get along...is that what you're saying?

And please, not ridiculous platitudes about "following the laws".

Now then, yes, you can make the argument that his attempt to argue the arrest was "resisting"...however, someone has yet to explain to me the need to surround a man with several cops for something as trivial as selling loose cigarettes, which is purely a revenue matter akin to a traffic ticket and a victimless crime.

I can't help but think if you, and those like you, were around we'd still be answering to the British.


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

TW, is that rather rambling answer in some way connected to the OP? Straw men and hypotheticals are great distractions, but not very convincing arguments.

It almost sounds like a rationalization for unprovoked violence against the police.

Can we agree there's no justification for executing 2 policemen, ever?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

TriWinkle said:


> But lets just go with this theory...You've done nothing wrong...Men in uniform walk up to you. Surround you. Restrict your freedom, search you, escort you away to a facility of their choosing, fingerprint you, strip search you and throw you in a cell with other people, who may have actually committed violent crimes, simply because they have the power to do so...You have to hire a lawyer to defend yourself, if you can afford one, if you can't good luck with the dog and pony show they call public defenders who usually encourage you to plead out to avoid a larger charge...you're sitting here telling me, that's an acceptable scenario to you?
> 
> You say nothing, you don't try to explain, you don't give voice to your frustration over the situation (which got this man killed), you just meekly go along to get along...is that what you're saying?
> 
> .


Editing out the emotional ranting, it comes down to this issue only as a sensible point to discuss.

First, if what you said was true, then I would try my best to talk my way out of it. A lot. Would I resist passively physically - possibly. I certainly would not help. But shoving back- no I probably wouldn't.

But of course you know from the news reports that this is not what happened. This man was observed violating the law. He had been arrested for doing the same thing numerous times. He was aware of the whole procedure probably better that the police. He was not confronted with a situation where he had been "doing nothing wrong." He had been arrested and in fact convicted of resisting arrest. 

As to what I personally think, which has nothing to do with what you chose to think I think, is there are a few who post as if the police are on a continuous rampage of assaulting innocent people. Their emotional commitment to the most obviously biased report of the same half truths and repeating endlessly the same few incidents of wrong doing by police shows that there is obviously a personal vendetta going on.

I worked in a place where police were called fairly often. I have stood (totally by accident on my part) between a person who pulled a gun on the police and the police, who responded the same way. In the many more than a dozen times I saw the police come to a scene, most ended in the police defusing the situation and sending the people about their business seperately without a big noise. I have seen them arrest people both out of control and mentally ill. 
In those calls, I have never seen anything more than the police grab hold of someone to handcuff them. I have seen them maintain their professional demeanor through things that had me shaking just watching.

So my experience is that it must be pretty rare for the police to do the sort of things that are touted as common place. I don't doubt that there are mistakes made by the police and that there are brutal police who never should be given authority. I even believe that there are systematic problems. But I don't believe your version of police at all. It goes contrary to all my experience.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Ozarks Tom said:


> TW, is that rather rambling answer in some way connected to the OP? Straw men and hypotheticals are great distractions, but not very convincing arguments.
> 
> It almost sounds like a rationalization for unprovoked violence against the police.
> 
> Can we agree there's no justification for executing 2 policemen, ever?


Yes, I think the murders had a sobering effect on many of the protesters. Everyone who is sincere about stopping unnecessary violence would feel terrible about it.

There was a valid observation amidst the other stuff.



TriWinkle said:


> Now Liberals (fans of big government) are out on the streets marching, protesting and basically making headlines protesting a problem that's been occurring for decades, and suddenly Conservatives (anti-gov) become benevolent towards all things government related.
> 
> Again, I have to wonder if this isn't why nothing in this country ever changes.
> 
> ...



I've watched this little ballet many times, with amazement and disgust.
And it goes both ways too, LOL.

Sometimes the same people who'd like to see the marijuana laws relaxed will turn around and call the water police on their neighbor for watering their own "grass"!:facepalm::hammer:

The part about the concern over lost tax revenue for one of the biggest city gov't in the U.S. was one I was waiting to see when the original "crime" that Garner was arrested for was mentioned.
The NYC "soda police" might have missed out on a raise this year after all!:icecream: 


I'm now living in an area of the south that at the time of the American Revolution was a stronghold of support for the Crown, although they'd probably never admit it, lol.:ashamed:

Speaking of which, having a wide variety of experiences helps prevent one from saying, "Well, I never saw any of that, so it probably is rare."
I've seen in LEO's from the very best, dedicated heroes, to the very worst, drug dealing thieves. 

As in other matters, the worst ones get the most publicity. :grump:

But people are strange to me. 
The best description I ever heard was a bucket of crabs.
Even if they are all heading for the boiling pot, let just one of them make to the lip of the bucket and the others will pull him back down before he can escape.:nono:


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

From Thomas Jefferson's first inaugural speech-

That, though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; 




farmrbrown said:


> Speaking of which, having a wide variety of experiences helps prevent one from saying, "Well, I never saw any of that, so it probably is rare."
> o:


In truth I have never been arrested nor have I been a policeman. But it is not reasonable to expect that having watched more than a dozen police actions , this experience should be discarded in favor of the selected, highly edited, agenda ridden reports peppered with hate. 

It is the unreasonable that should be questioned and one of the hallmarks of unreasonable is hatefullness.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Not sure why you would direct that quote about unreasonableness and comment about hatefulness towards me....:shrug:........I'm neither.
My suggestion was that the more you see of the world the less likely you are to be surprised.

If you are implying that anything I have witnessed needs documentation, it won't be forthcoming.
Generally the good and bad congregate together, so if you haven't seen the bad, you are fortunate.
The Sheriff from my childhood was infamous enough that they made a movie about him, "Cool hand Luke".
He lived a few miles from us. I can tell you the book is better, the author spent time on that chain gang, and the stories I know would pale in comparison to the Hollywood version.
His successor owned the local airport and his son flew in bales from Mexico and dumped them in the pasture next door to us before landing. He never got caught but now is a deputy patrolling the Florida Turnpike.
Of course the city cops had a few of their own scams running from confiscating cars and dope off the books and reselling them to some pretty raunchy sexual escapades from which a few had to resign.
But no, I won't be quoting names and DEA reports, let sleeping dogs lie.
BTW, if you're in Northern California, my SIL can point you in the right direction if you want to see some things first hand.
Me, I've seen enough.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

farmrbrown said:


> Not sure why you would direct that quote about unreasonableness and comment about hatefulness towards me....:shrug:........I'm neither.
> My suggestion was that the more you see of the world the less likely you are to be surprised.
> 
> .


The hatefulness is the edited reporting designed to reinforce hate. Such as the constant refering to "unarmed" as the sole adjective and never mentioning the less flattering adjectives of having been previously convicted of resisting arrest, that might have an influence on opinion. In reading so many of this sort of published artcle and the corresponding posts that link them, that is the hatefulness of which I spoke. And was not directed at you personally anyway.

It's like the person who tells you 'I just had a car accident and got hurt.' A normal person would feel sympathy for them. But the if really unsympathetic details were added, like 'I was drunk and had an accident where I injured another person and this was while driving on a suspended license' the 'got hurt' part is much more coldly received.

Police are no more saintly than many people, so that there are are bad police abusing their office would not surprise me at all. But having seen police acting well many times, it is not reasonable to assume that this particular policeman was the evil exception just based on the result. It needs an assumption of widespread police evil to go there. 

If there was evidence that this particular or even that this was a dangerous, unnecessary action, then that is a useful discussion. But the police are all evil storm troopers bent being used to control the population is way into hatefulness. And eggs the already irrational to extremes.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

CraterCove said:


> All I see there are excuses why it's okay. ~shrug~ No one said anyone was perfect. But that's never an excuse to accept poor judgement and poor reaction in someone who holds the life and death stick in their hands.


Sounds like you are making a case for the cops killings to be ok.
What happened in MO was unfortunate, but, leesee, how 'bout ya don't rob, & then attack a cop & try to get his gun?
how 'bout if you are committing even the pettiest of crimes ya don't resist arrest?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

simi-steading said:


> I think many people are missing something here..
> 
> Our government has been training people to kill, then sending them off to kill people in perpetual wars under the guise of "keeping us safe"...
> 
> ...


I really cannot be live you posted this nor can I believe there were 'likes'...
This country has had military serve valiantly for ever so now our military are at fault for blacks killing cops! 
Whata leap!


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Tricky Grama said:


> I really cannot be live you posted this nor can I believe there were 'likes'...
> This country has had military serve valiantly for ever so now our military are at fault for blacks killing cops!
> Whata leap!


Very tin foil hat going on, guess maybe there are not any black former military. :hammer:


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> I really cannot be live you posted this nor can I believe there were 'likes'...
> This country has had military serve valiantly for ever so now our military are at fault for blacks killing cops!
> Whata leap!


Extreme leap!!! What a crock of smelly stuff. That poster is incredibly ill informed and insulting. No understanding of ROE's nor the training our military had.

He/she seems totally unable to put blame where it is due, finds it easier to shift it to others.


----------



## TriWinkle (Oct 2, 2011)

Ozarks Tom said:


> TW, is that rather rambling answer in some way connected to the OP? Straw men and hypotheticals are great distractions, but not very convincing arguments.
> 
> It almost sounds like a rationalization for unprovoked violence against the police.
> 
> Can we agree there's no justification for executing 2 policemen, ever?


My apologies for failing to live up to your standards...This was a discussion within the discussion, or so I believed...But yes, if it makes you feel better, I personally believe there's no justification in any unprovoked execution 2 people. Their professions are less relevant to me, a shame that seems to be a determining factor to you.


----------



## TriWinkle (Oct 2, 2011)

where I want to said:


> Editing out the emotional ranting, it comes down to this issue only as a sensible point to discuss.
> 
> First, if what you said was true, then I would try my best to talk my way out of it. A lot. Would I resist passively physically - possibly. I certainly would not help. But shoving back- no I probably wouldn't.
> 
> ...


Your personal experiences, which cannot be confirmed, are no more valid than my "emotional ranting" (very nice, the condescending air of superiority really added weight to your position).

So, sans emotional rant, here is an objective view point...Cops cover for each other. Plain and simple. Good or bad, they have an "us against them" mentality. If they don't, then they don't stay cops for long. 

They are not "part of the community" they are trained not to trust the community. I'd site example, but "straw men" don't seem too popular with you. Though your examples were truly awe inspiring.

Everyone makes mistakes. That's a given. No one is asking for perfection, but as citizens we deserve accountability to those who have been given the power to take our freedom, or our lives, at their whim. As long as that remains minimal, then this will continue. This isn't one section of the country facing this, it is epidemic, you can find it everywhere. Now why do they have this mentality? Because they've been getting away with it for so long.

The police unions, where applicable, have helped insure that...If memory serves those are real popular with the conservatives on here clamoring to make excuses for their watch dogs.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

TriWinkle said:


> Your personal experiences, which cannot be confirmed, are no more valid than my "emotional ranting" (very nice, the condescending air of superiority really added weight to your position).
> 
> So, sans emotional rant, here is an objective view point...Cops cover for each other. Plain and simple. Good or bad, they have an "us against them" mentality. If they don't, then they don't stay cops for long.
> 
> ...


Yes, it is true that police tend to stick together as do doctors, teachers, unionists, etc. Everyone facing unreasonable expectations and vulnerability to legal and public accusations does so. Because some of the accusations are true does not mean that many others are reasonable. And there are many accusations, selected for effect and edited to eliminate conditions, given here. If fact, the simple recognition of complexity immediately seems to be shouted down.

BTW I do not demand that you believe my experiences, although I expect they are pretty common, only that I know them to be true so can't believe your extreme assertions. If you had personal experiences to offer as evidence, I would be interested in them and would tend to believe them if not clearly irrational. But to continuously trot out the same edited for effect stories is not going to carry much weight with people who want to examine the issues critically. Especially when a simple web search produces facts that make the assertions sound silly.

When the continuously asked questions about how the police are supposed to conduct arrests of a person who is resisting without a chance of injury gets answered then maybe this debate can actually be sane.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

I guess you have not been around those that high on something like Meth, or things even worse. Resisting arrest is like fighting three people in ring. When they are all hopped up on Dude, and their Adrenalin is flowing like Niagara Then you can see just how TOUGH a officer has to be to even get them Cuffed. Maybe after these dude heads get sane themselves the cops can also cool down some, But Not Until THAT. That is why officers are getting armed as much as or more than what the folks they are arresting have you can't blame them one bit.


----------



## TriWinkle (Oct 2, 2011)

where I want to said:


> Yes, it is true that police tend to stick together as do doctors, teachers, unionists, etc. Everyone facing unreasonable expectations and vulnerability to legal and public accusations does so. Because some of the accusations are true does not mean that many others are reasonable. And there are many accusations, selected for effect and edited to eliminate conditions, given here. If fact, the simple recognition of complexity immediately seems to be shouted down.
> 
> BTW I do not demand that you believe my experiences, although I expect they are pretty common, only that I know them to be true so can't believe your extreme assertions. If you had personal experiences to offer as evidence, I would be interested in them and would tend to believe them if not clearly irrational. But to continuously trot out the same edited for effect stories is not going to carry much weight with people who want to examine the issues critically. Especially when a simple web search produces facts that make the assertions sound silly.
> 
> When the continuously asked questions about how the police are supposed to conduct arrests of a person who is resisting without a chance of injury gets answered then maybe this debate can actually be sane.



Ahhh, I see, the old "everyone else does it, so it's ok if they do it too" argument...very good. You realize you really just said that, right?

Tell me, which one of these other professions: doctors, teachers, unionists have the right to take your freedom or your life? And if it's challenged or questioned get a two week paid vacation (aka paid administrative leave)?

But but but, cops are better than everyone else, right? Their job is so much tougher than everyone else, which is why we afford them these extra privileges...So why are we comparing them to people as mundane as doctors and teachers? Cops are exceptional until they're not? You don't get to pick and choose. Either they're held on your pedestal because of the rigors of their job, or theirs is no more difficult than a school teacher. You don't get to play it both ways.

BTW, I'm glad to know you make no demands on my beliefs, but when you share personal experiences as validation for your side of a debate, then you expect either my belief or that of the viewing audience...Sorry, it truly isn't personal, but I'm skeptical. Now I know that won't cause you any sleepless nights, but it simply serves to say I can't rely on those accounts to reassure me cops aren't afforded too much power these days.

That said, given your tendency to belittle my published examples, I'm in no hurry to share personal examples with you. Additionally, I'm certain you'd find them as credible as I find yours...So why bother?

As for the examples I have trotted out, if there's more to the story on any of those, by all means, feel free to share...Did the flash bang grenade not end up in a playpen with a sleeping baby? Was a man not killed in the bike lane because a cop was checking his email? If there's more to each other these stories, I'd appreciate it if you'd share, as I may sleep a little better (consider if a gift for the holidays) knowing that these acts did not happen as described or, if they did, there was some form of disciplinary action taken against the cops involved besides a note in their files. Please provide the unedited versions. My simple web search failed to uncover the version you refer to.

To be clear, I do not believe cops should subject themselves to needless danger in order to make an arrest. That said, I question the reasoning behind some of the arrests. Again, the charge with Eric Garner would have been akin to a traffic ticket...write the script, hand it to him, let him pay his fine and be done. Instead, he's dead...yes, yes, by his own choice...The cops were amped up with "adrenaline running like Niagara Falls" as your friend so eloquently tried to put it and they went after a mark they'd hit before. My understanding is that they'd initially been there to break up a fight, which was settled prior to their arrivals (seconds count, they were just minutes away), so why hassle this guy? Did they see him sell the loose cigarettes? This man who knew the cops were likely on their way to break up a fight decided to make a few quick bucks?

I thought it was real classy all the cops, and their toadies, wearing the "I can breathe" shirt...It goes to show their deep respect for the lives those of you believe that they protect. Ooops sorry, probably got too emotional there for ya...Or was there some unedited version of that image I was supposed to see?

Anyway, I hope you enjoy the holidays. Have a good one.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

TriWinkle said:


> Ahhh, I see, the old "everyone else does it, so it's ok if they do it too" argument...very good. You realize you really just said that, right?
> 
> Tell me, which one of these other professions: doctors, teachers, unionists have the right to take your freedom or your life? And if it's challenged or questioned get a two week paid vacation (aka paid administrative leave)?
> 
> ...


Nothing of what you said was what I said. As seems to be typical you have created that out of a seeming intentional desire to denigrate any difference of opinion.

I said it happens. The rest is intrepretation you added that must come from a personal belief that anyone who doesn't chime in with support must be an enemy.

I totally disagree- I certainly can pick and choose. I can even pick and choose from the same profession. From the same group in the same town. The world is full of degrees of variation. At least my world is. 

If your world is black and white, then look to that.


----------



## TriWinkle (Oct 2, 2011)

where I want to said:


> Nothing of what you said was what I said. As seems to be typical you have created that out of a seeming intentional desire to denigrate any difference of opinion.
> 
> I said it happens. The rest is intrepretation you added that must come from a personal belief that anyone who doesn't chime in with support must be an enemy.
> 
> ...


I believe I said exactly what you said...you hold cops on a pedestal, but then want to compare them to other, lesser, professions to validate their "stick together" mentality.

You scoff and belittle examples provided, without providing evidence to support your disbelief...

The world is all "shade of gray" to you...Lovely, I hope that works for you...However, given that our country has gone to war numerous times over one groups tyranny over another, it seems ironic how many of you support their unchallenged right to victimize the general public...Our soldiers in war zones have to use more restraint against the enemy than cops do against our own citizens.

But yeah, we're done here...You provide no supporting evidence, your basic rhetoric is "all cops aren't bad"...terrific...here's mine, "not all citizens who are arrested deserve to be..."

So when your cops understand that, perhaps we can be more understanding of their foibles.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

Am I getting this right? So if a police officer let's say arrests an elderly woman and in the process breaks some bones, it was due to osteoporosis?


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I've explained my post about the police hiring ex-military in another thread about this same thing... 

If you don't understand what I meant by it, then you're doomed to live out a history we're not going to be proud of... 

A police state is controlled by a military style police force.. if you don't get the reason so many police agencies have been hiring ex-military for their training, then you haven't been watching what has been happening to this country since 9/11


Again I wish that you are all feeling secure with your new found safety you've asked the government to provide you... 

I find it hilarious that those who are giving up their constitutional rights and supporting the people taking those rights from them, are calling me reckless......

We are getting so close to martial law that it's not even funny... I's only a matter of time..... you've asked for them to keep you so safe, so that they are going to start locking you in your homes to keep you safe... They've already been pushing curfews...

This is AMERICA... we are not a nanny state, that needs to be told to get off the streets at a certain time just so we're safe......


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

Tricky Grama said:


> I really cannot be live you posted this nor can I believe there were 'likes'...
> This country has had military serve valiantly for ever so now our military are at fault for blacks killing cops!
> Whata leap!


You are a HOOT... 

Now you show me where I said anything about blaming them for killing black people? Or for people killing cops... WOW.. how does your mind work????

You have one heck of way of reading and trying to understand what someone is saying.. 

I explained to you already what I meant by that post.. BEFORE you posted this... So you're still trying to twist something to fit your agenda that you know is false... 

So glad you know how to make others look bad, so your twisted views on freedom can look legitimate.. .

Ex-military are being used and exploited by police departments, just like you are by the politicians you are asking to keep you safe... They are using YOUR fears to control you... 

Carry on... You've got it all figured out...


----------



## cedarvalley (Feb 28, 2012)

Wake up American's. This is another hoax, perpetrated by our own government.
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07uSgiFRTHc[/ame]
This video is just a smidgen of the evidence. They are trying to stir this race war, and anti- gun narrative to a predetermined agenda. We all just believe what we see on the Tv as reality, and it couldn't be further from the truth. Ask yourself why the media and banks and all the key officials in government are Zionist Talmudist jews? Coincidence ? I think not! Please see that the enemy is not foreign, but domestic, and it didn't just start with the current administration.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)




----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

I GOT to buy some stock in Reynolds aluminum. There are sure some far out folks around these days.


----------



## cedarvalley (Feb 28, 2012)

arabian knight said:


>


 HMMMM. Wonder who got that started?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

cedarvalley said:


> HMMMM. Wonder who got that started?


 People that CARE and Love the police and what they do protecting the citizens of this country that is who. Nobody wants to go back to a lawless society and if some do, there is a island in their name to own and live on.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

People don't want to go back to a lawless society, but they don't want to live in a police state either, and we're much closer to a police state than we are a lawless society.

Everyone keeps blaming the police, or the thugs... The ones really at fault with all of this is our government, and the rich and powerful who are buying the government. Things are moving right along as they planned... 

Pinky and the Brain could only wish..


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Just click on this link and be part of the group that over looks things on a live web cam complete with sound and you too can be part of the elite that wants to control things. I find it fascinating and watch sometimes for some time wondering what those people are doing and where they are going and what they are thinking at the mess that is in NYC. LOL

http://www.earthcam.com/usa/newyork/timessquare/?cam=tsrobo3


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/police-off-duty-cop-saved-lives-in-mall/
http://7onlintrepretne.com/family/p...-and-does-cpr-at-same-time-on-toddler/332732/
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/11/portland_police_officers_aid_t.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...st-responded-died-save-life-article-1.1751556
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-bridgeport-toddler-rescue-20140913-story.html
http://www.mycentraljersey.com/stor...4/police-rescue-cpr-south-brunswick/70049440/

These are just the links from the first page of a google search of "police save life". Listing these is silly as your "proof" of the wrongs done by police but at least they are not all from agenda driven blogs. But whatever floats your boat. 

I have not at all supported "unchallenged right to victimize" anyone. You just interpret any remark that does not consist of some version of "hang them all" as support. 




> [=TriWinkle;7327278]I believe I said exactly what you said...you hold cops on a pedestal, but then want to compare them to other, lesser, professions to validate their "stick together" mentality.
> 
> You scoff and belittle examples provided, without providing evidence to support your disbelief...
> 
> ...


----------



## TriWinkle (Oct 2, 2011)

where I want to said:


> http://www.cbsnews.com/news/police-off-duty-cop-saved-lives-in-mall/
> http://7onlintrepretne.com/family/p...-and-does-cpr-at-same-time-on-toddler/332732/
> http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/11/portland_police_officers_aid_t.html
> http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...st-responded-died-save-life-article-1.1751556
> ...


Your example of their saving lives in no way refutes the examples I cited earlier that you tried to dismiss...Y'know, the ones you said could be easily disproved with a "simple Google search"? I'm still waiting for that.

I don't doubt that lives have been saved because of their intervention, but that in no way justifies the other behavior I've witnessed...A little good doesn't justify a little evil...A lot of good doesn't justify a little evil either.

Painting me as a fanatic who only sees things as my way won't work either...However, if asking for more accountability of the police for their actions is considered "my way is the only way", then fine...But ask yourself this...as it stands right now, a SWAT team can raid your home, kill your dog, threaten your family at gunpoint and endanger the lives of everyone...should you react violently and, God forbid, wound or even kill one before realizing that it's law enforcement breaking into your home, you will likely be killed (man was killed, wife hid in closet with their child and called 911), at the very least brought up on charges (man facing possible death penalty right now for this)...and the worst part...they could have mistaken your address for their intended target...and no charges/ramifications would be applied against the offenders (I provide the briefest of examples as past experience with you shows they carry little weight).

Their code of silence, their lies and fabricating scenarios to justify their behavior and other actions that have become the accepted norm are the reasons why their behavior is continuing to escalate unchecked.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Doncha just love the protesters? Its their right, after all...
"Deck the Halls with Rows of Dead Cops..." Classy.

http://joemiller.us/2014/12/watch-d...il&utm_term=0_065b6c381c-8536d33c49-230980529


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

While I don't support the protesters methods. This is a good reminder of why we need protest. And vigilence!

http://news.yahoo.com/auschwitz-anniversary-reminder-danger-staying-silent-084602735.html


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

TriWinkle said:


> Your example of their saving lives in no way refutes the examples I cited earlier that you tried to dismiss...Y'know, the ones you said could be easily disproved with a "simple Google search"? I'm still waiting for that.
> 
> I don't doubt that lives have been saved because of their intervention, but that in no way justifies the other behavior I've witnessed...A little good doesn't justify a little evil...A lot of good doesn't justify a little evil either.
> 
> ...


But that is all you have done. Provide a bad result with all the details edited out. And even if there was a totally innocent person caught up in police error, nothing is ever said about the results like law suits or disciplinary action or procedure correction. You simply assume that the evil police care nothing for anyone. And that there are nothing but lies and coverups. Everywhere.
Here there is currently a deputy under arrest for sexually assaulting a person he arrested. The police took action based on the complaint, no cover up, no delay other than time to investigate. This deputy will be going to trial soon. The police chief was practically in tears about his officer's behavior when he announced his arrest. 
There was a man killed by police a few months ago in which no indictment followed after investigation but the family will be pursuing a law suit. Detail will be forth coming. There is hardly anything that will not generate a civil suit if nothing else. 
But you insist on there is no response.
But since you dismiss all my personal edperience, I'm sure that will follow now.


----------



## TriWinkle (Oct 2, 2011)

where I want to said:


> But that is all you have done. Provide a bad result with all the details edited out. And even if there was a totally innocent person caught up in police error, nothing is ever said about the results like law suits or disciplinary action or procedure correction. You simply assume that the evil police care nothing for anyone. And that there are nothing but lies and coverups. Everywhere.
> Here there is currently a deputy under arrest for sexually assaulting a person he arrested. The police took action based on the complaint, no cover up, no delay other than time to investigate. This deputy will be going to trial soon. The police chief was practically in tears about his officer's behavior when he announced his arrest.
> There was a man killed by police a few months ago in which no indictment followed after investigation but the family will be pursuing a law suit. Detail will be forth coming. There is hardly anything that will not generate a civil suit if nothing else.
> But you insist on there is no response.
> But since you dismiss all my personal edperience, I'm sure that will follow now.


Law suits? People have been killed, wounded, endangered, crippled, had their freedom stolen, their bodies violated, had their liberties taken and you believe law suits and disciplinary action are suitable? If any other citizen committed such act they'd be jailed or looking at the death penalty. Cops face "paid administrative leave" or "retraining", possibly a note on their record...I'm sure the victims, or their families, find that comforting.

"We killed your son/daughter/dog/friend/neighbor, but no worries. Once our officer comes off his *paid administrative leave* we plan to make a note in his permanent record..."

At this point, I doubt the sincerity of your position here, as logic that ridiculous can only lead me to believe you're a troll.

You continue to dodge questions, never validated your claims that my example are "edited" versions and that there are some versions out there where the cops look glorious when they mistakenly kill someone and now you've begun to play the martyr..."since you dismiss all my personal experience..."

I didn't dismiss it, I didn't belittle it, I simply said it had no more validity to me than my examples (y'know, those "heavily edited" ones) did to you. if that is synonymous with dismissal to you, then I can only imagine that was how you treated my examples. I mean, I knew you disparaged them, but didn't realize you dismissed them. Makes sense though...

Y'know, all emotion aside (just so you'll feel good about yourself), whenever there's been major change in this country (women's rights, minority rights, etc.) there are always two side of the issues...Those who wish to maintain the status quo, and those who sought change...Now looking back (with that 20/20 hindsight) we know those who were attempting to keep things "as it" were wrong...Guess, which side you're on at the moment.

Things need to change...If you don't believe that, you're wrong...That's not subjective, that's objective...those in power, and their watchdogs, have been victimizing people for too long. I'm glad you haven't felt the boot yet on your neck...a shame you're not willing to stick it out unless it directly affects you.

One final note on your latest example...do you think the sheriff's office handling the matter as they are (tears and all), because of people like you who give unquestioning support, or perhaps it's due to those who dare to hold protests, "die ins", film cops and basically scream for accountability?


----------

