superblue Posted December 25, 2014 Share Posted December 25, 2014 Ever since the incident in Ferguson there has been too much of a cry about police brutality, the reports are non stop in the news.... What I am wondering is, do these protesters even know what they want ? Has anyone heard of a list of demands ? Are they wanting all white police officers to undergo some kind of sensitivity training, or do they want all white police officers removed from serving ? Or do they just want to see any police officer put on trial an sent to prison as a scapegoat / sacrifice to end their rage ? And then what ever it is they want, and if they got it, would it be enough, would they feel satisfaction or go vent their frustrations with their lives in another direction ? Then I was wondering, what would these cities that are crying foul, got what they seem to want, which is no police. Let the police in these respective cities take two weeks off with pay, they all deserve a break from the bs that is being spewed. And when things go south fast, and the national guard comes rolling in to quell the " protesting / rioting " exactly who would be to blame for the national guard doing their job ? probably still blame the police any way I suspect. damned if ya do and damned if ya don't scenario I think. OR, for those who think that guns are the problem, why not take away all police fire arms, and give them and old timey whistle, top hat and baton.... ugh that wouldn't work, because if they did manage to disarm an criminal that had a fire arm, and used their batons on the criminal, we still have police brutality. in what world, can police do their job, to protect themselves and others with out being declared using brutality or being labeled as a whole as racist . ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not A Real Name Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Your masters disagree as to the purpose of the police. http://nypost.com/2013/01/27/city-says-cops-had-no-duty-to-protect-subway-hero-who-subdued-killer/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superblue Posted December 30, 2014 Author Share Posted December 30, 2014 (edited) Your masters disagree as to the purpose of the police.http://nypost.com/2013/01/27/city-says-cops-had-no-duty-to-protect-subway-hero-who-subdued-killer/ Well I can promise I don't have " masters ", and I read the article, and all I could gather was a couple of police officers either witnessed a fight and did nothing about it, or someone notified them that a wanted man was in the area and did nothing about it. The problem the article really seems to be addressing is that the victim either acted on his own, with out police assistance got hurt, and supposedly we are to believe the police were just nonchalant about helping the guy or didn't want too, and now the victim is filing a law suit for an enormous amount of money. The guys lesson should have been , don't be a vigilante and then cry when you get hurt in the process and the police don't help you. An the cops lesson should have been don't be lazy and look into something right away instead of ignoring someone. Now I don't know what you were getting at, or what " your masters " want you to think, but with the recent ambushes on police, the mounting protests against them, and the lack of respect they get for protecting an ungrateful city, I would not blame them for taking time off and letting the national guard come in while they take some R N R. Edited December 30, 2014 by superblue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 So if someone gets stabbed in the face, they shouldn't fight back. They should wait for the police. I think you should reread the article carefully. Apply the arrow of time to the events. Then read this one: http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2014/10/nyc-gravity-knife-law-arrests.php?page=all It isn't protection to violate the civil rights of human beings. Who is Akai Gurley? Watch this bizarre overreaction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFJnr1_bjSM I could get being upset with the guy, but when the moment is well past, and there is clearly no danger, look at how the man is shoved away. Those are the actions of bullies, not protectors. Perhaps there is a reason for the reactions in New York. Pretend that the police really are just ordinary human beings. Pretend they don't have magical powers, or the right to respond disproportionately to the actions of others. Pretend that defending life isn't the sole province of men in costumes, and that we are permitted to defend ourselves or others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superblue Posted December 30, 2014 Author Share Posted December 30, 2014 maybe I miss read it, what I thought I read, was that some guy identified a wanted criminal , and then confronted the person to try an apprehend him, if that was the case, then I still say he decided to take the chance at being a vigilante , got hurt, and paid the price in the process. that is on him. now if it was different , if he spotted the criminal, reported it to the police, the police did nothing, or ignored the report, then what ? It is still an individuals responsibility to assume all the risk when confronting a criminal, if the person didn't want to risk getting hurt, then he should have called for an officer with a brain. I don't really feel like re reading the article or anymore, are we allowed to protect ourselves and others with out police assistance, of course, that isn't what I was getting at in any shape or form. That being said, the same applies, you don't sue the police for your own actions when they are not around, you want to sue the police for not being proactive when you screamed bloody murder, fine, but still if you take the risk and get hurt, don't expect to get a giant reward for it. Defending yourself still doesn't mean you get a reward for doing so; same for protecting someone else, you don't get promised a reward or the right to win a law suit for doing the right thing in life. your point about police over reacting, yes, they do over react, just like protesters do, or a group of people do or anyone else for that matter. people over react all the time. An that ellen dance dare I am familiar with that, if anything the guy should have sued ellen for the stupid idea, it was funny, but when you do something in public, and behind someones back, that is what happens, I wouldn't find it find it funny if I turned around n found some fool behind me dancing. Did the police over react in that instance, debatable , the guy took a risk, to do something " funny " behind a public official with out permission to do so on video, considering doing it was to record it, and then what happens, the guy finds himself surrounded by police being hand cuffed and shoved around n put into a squad car, lesson is, don't screw with the police. Police are not there to be poked and prodded by fools during the day. An the police could have acted better in judgment instead of wasting valuable time on something and someone stupid. In the end the guy started it, I don't feel sorry for him. But with the way things in our country are now going against the police, I would say the police are on a razors edge and will be very paranoid and over reacting for awhile, and what is not helping is a President that waited too long to comment and work to ease tensions, an race baiters / flamers pouring fuel on the fire of those who are filled with pain and angst and taking it out on the wrong people instead of seeking peace in a positive manner else where through religious leaders. The police know who their own bad eggs are, they know they were not well liked to begin with, California shed the light on the wrong doings a long time ago,, we don't see police acting like fools against a mayor they don't like, they have protested in the most nonviolent way non aggressive way as possible and still do their jobs. And if the police are so horrible, marshal law can always be a back up plan, give people something really to complain about and wishing for the police to come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Always with the violence. Bless your heart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superblue Posted January 1, 2015 Author Share Posted January 1, 2015 Always with the violence. Bless your heart. Violence has it purpose and place; can't fight crime with hugs and smiles, and ya cant expect to create mob justice based on race baiting and lump the police into this one giant unfair murdering machine that it isn't and expect the police to just take it laying down and not become unwound an uptight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Violence has it purpose and place; can't fight crime with hugs and smiles, and ya cant expect to create mob justice based on race baiting and lump the police into this one giant unfair murdering machine that it isn't and expect the police to just take it laying down and not become unwound an uptight. "Crime" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little2add Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 You must have really slow muggers in your locale. If you don't live somewhere where the police heroically initiate violence in order to enforce gun control, I recommend obtaining a means of self defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice_nine Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 oh man I've missed winchester's government/police posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 An army of one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superblue Posted January 3, 2015 Author Share Posted January 3, 2015 An army of one. you listen to too much of Alex Jones on infowars.com I can only listen to him for about 20 minutes though. an the website is so clogged I dunno where to begin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 you listen to too much of Alex Jones on infowars.com I can only listen to him for about 20 minutes though. an the website is so clogged I dunno where to begin. Where do you get this? Gerard Casey is someone I listen to. I have seen very little of Alex Jones, but what I've seen, I didn't care for. I don't think he's a libertarian anarchist. Gerard Casey is, and is a convert to Catholicism. As such, his morality matches my own. His speech starts around 1:30. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoQ6vQf3X6Q[/media] And here's his conversion story: http://www.academia.edu/332857/Faith_In_Search_of_Understanding I am not a convert, so spare me any of your theories there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now