CDZ Police justified shootings

Nonsense...your comparing terrorists to cops was smug and shows leftist groupthink which amounts to trolling your opinion in unrelated threads.

ter·ror·ism
ˈterəˌrizəm/
noun
  1. the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
  2. violent and intimidating gang activity
    • street terrorism
Please note that the fundamental nature or morality of an act is not altered by its "legality". It's also worthy of note that the current trend in this country of police getting away with murder in the streets, while cop killers are hunted at any expense, is a purposeful attempt to send the public a message: "Our agents are untouchable. Disobedience - even self-defense - will not be tolerated." This is relevant because if Sterling didn't actually commit a moral crime, the police trying to arrest him was an act of aggression, thus self-defense would be justified.

Just sayin'.
EGarner resisted arrest
so--I ask you--when someone resists arrest, the cops should say ''ok --we won't arrest you''??

Garner wasn't doing anything morally wrong, so yes, the cops should not attempt to arrest him. Their problem is that they've bought into the lie that "following orders", regardless of their moral nature, makes anything they do justifiable.
morally has nothing to do with it ....the cops legally wanted to detain him and he resisted--simple

And right there is the whole problem - “morality has nothing to do with it.” Next time you’re wondering why the world is so screwed up, just look in the mirror and repeat that position.

Legality, in this case, is merely a justification for immoral action. If the action was moral, it would not need the authority of law to justify it. Man does not have the power, by political ritual or otherwise, to alter morality. The belief that he can is responsible for all the greatest atrocities of the world - the Stalins, the Hitlers, the bombing at Hiroshima/Nagasaki, the Christians thrown to the lions, American Slavery, and on, and on, and on.

Until morality is recognized as paramount, and we hold to these principles above all else, all the political talk on these boards is a waste of time. No amount of shuffling the pieces around will make up for the lack of this understanding.
 
what??!! so if the police get an anonymous complaint about a sniper at a Las Vegas hotel, or a shooter at a Parkland school, they should get there and just leave??

"If the complaint was anonymous, then when the police arrived at the scene, if there was no present danger and no one was complaining, they should have left." - Me
so the complaint is someone has a gun.....they see AS and should just leave?? they should not investigate?

Yes, investigate, and if there is no present danger, or anyone complaining, the investigation is over. They were attempting to restrain him. Again, I don't know all the facts of the case, but I didn't read anything about a present individual saying he did something wrong against them, or anything about him doing anything wrong when the police arrived.
yes--you just said it--you don't know the facts
...but the people that investigated it and said the cops were justified, do know the facts
case closed ..you have no argument--see below
...so--
1. cops called for someone with a gun wearing a RED shirt selling CDs
At about 12:30 a.m. on July 5, someone called 911 to report that a black man wearing a red shirt and selling CDs had “pulled a pistol” and had a gun in his pocket. Salamoni and Lake responded and saw Sterling, dressed in a red shirt and standing by a table with a stack of CDs.

The encounter lasted less than 90 seconds from that moment until the firing of the final shot. Officers told Sterling to put his hands on the hood of a car, and when he did not, a struggle ensued.
Justice Department reveals decision not to charge officers in Alton Sterling case

So what? He had a gun. So do the cops, and they’re the only ones who commited murder with it, by this account. I don’t see anything here about a person at the scene, or anywhere else, claiming that Sterling robbed them or attacked them. If two hicks with shotguns responded to that call instead of police, and the same events went down, would you still feel the same way? If not, you either don’t believe in equal rights, or have yet to realize the inconsistency of believing a badge changes the nature of the situation.
 
what??!! so if the police get an anonymous complaint about a sniper at a Las Vegas hotel, or a shooter at a Parkland school, they should get there and just leave??

"If the complaint was anonymous, then when the police arrived at the scene, if there was no present danger and no one was complaining, they should have left." - Me
so the complaint is someone has a gun.....they see AS and should just leave?? they should not investigate?

Yes, investigate, and if there is no present danger, or anyone complaining, the investigation is over. They were attempting to restrain him. Again, I don't know all the facts of the case, but I didn't read anything about a present individual saying he did something wrong against them, or anything about him doing anything wrong when the police arrived.
yes--you just said it--you don't know the facts
...but the people that investigated it and said the cops were justified, do know the facts
case closed ..you have no argument--see below
...so--
1. cops called for someone with a gun wearing a RED shirt selling CDs
At about 12:30 a.m. on July 5, someone called 911 to report that a black man wearing a red shirt and selling CDs had “pulled a pistol” and had a gun in his pocket. Salamoni and Lake responded and saw Sterling, dressed in a red shirt and standing by a table with a stack of CDs.

The encounter lasted less than 90 seconds from that moment until the firing of the final shot. Officers told Sterling to put his hands on the hood of a car, and when he did not, a struggle ensued.
Justice Department reveals decision not to charge officers in Alton Sterling case

So what? He had a gun. So do the cops, and they’re the only ones who commited murder with it, by this account. I don’t see anything here about a person at the scene, or anywhere else, claiming that Sterling robbed them or attacked them. If two hicks with shotguns responded to that call instead of police, and the same events went down, would you still feel the same way? If not, you either don’t believe in equal rights, or have yet to realize the inconsistency of believing a badge changes the nature of the situation.
1. they didn't commit murder--so your point there is worthless
2. it doesn't matter--AS was given lawful orders and he did not comply
3.the man with the red shirt did have a gun and resisted
...so whenever the cops get a call--they should just look around, and if everything is ok, they should leave??? !!!! not talk to anyone?? not investigate??how ridiculous
 
what??!! so if the police get an anonymous complaint about a sniper at a Las Vegas hotel, or a shooter at a Parkland school, they should get there and just leave??

"If the complaint was anonymous, then when the police arrived at the scene, if there was no present danger and no one was complaining, they should have left." - Me
so the complaint is someone has a gun.....they see AS and should just leave?? they should not investigate?

Yes, investigate, and if there is no present danger, or anyone complaining, the investigation is over. They were attempting to restrain him. Again, I don't know all the facts of the case, but I didn't read anything about a present individual saying he did something wrong against them, or anything about him doing anything wrong when the police arrived.
yes--you just said it--you don't know the facts
...but the people that investigated it and said the cops were justified, do know the facts
case closed ..you have no argument--see below
...so--
1. cops called for someone with a gun wearing a RED shirt selling CDs
At about 12:30 a.m. on July 5, someone called 911 to report that a black man wearing a red shirt and selling CDs had “pulled a pistol” and had a gun in his pocket. Salamoni and Lake responded and saw Sterling, dressed in a red shirt and standing by a table with a stack of CDs.

The encounter lasted less than 90 seconds from that moment until the firing of the final shot. Officers told Sterling to put his hands on the hood of a car, and when he did not, a struggle ensued.
Justice Department reveals decision not to charge officers in Alton Sterling case

So what? He had a gun. So do the cops, and they’re the only ones who commited murder with it, by this account. I don’t see anything here about a person at the scene, or anywhere else, claiming that Sterling robbed them or attacked them. If two hicks with shotguns responded to that call instead of police, and the same events went down, would you still feel the same way? If not, you either don’t believe in equal rights, or have yet to realize the inconsistency of believing a badge changes the nature of the situation.
that is a derogatory name--no need to be that way
2 ''hicks'' responding?? that doesn't make sense--poor analogy....2 hicks are going to respond to a police dispatch call??what??
 
that is a derogatory name--no need to be that way
2 ''hicks'' responding?? that doesn't make sense--poor analogy....2 hicks are going to respond to a police dispatch call??what??


Agreed.....Good catch...That's what Neo-Marxists do to groups or people they don't like. They insult, ridicule and isolate them.
 
"If the complaint was anonymous, then when the police arrived at the scene, if there was no present danger and no one was complaining, they should have left." - Me
so the complaint is someone has a gun.....they see AS and should just leave?? they should not investigate?

Yes, investigate, and if there is no present danger, or anyone complaining, the investigation is over. They were attempting to restrain him. Again, I don't know all the facts of the case, but I didn't read anything about a present individual saying he did something wrong against them, or anything about him doing anything wrong when the police arrived.
yes--you just said it--you don't know the facts
...but the people that investigated it and said the cops were justified, do know the facts
case closed ..you have no argument--see below
...so--
1. cops called for someone with a gun wearing a RED shirt selling CDs
At about 12:30 a.m. on July 5, someone called 911 to report that a black man wearing a red shirt and selling CDs had “pulled a pistol” and had a gun in his pocket. Salamoni and Lake responded and saw Sterling, dressed in a red shirt and standing by a table with a stack of CDs.

The encounter lasted less than 90 seconds from that moment until the firing of the final shot. Officers told Sterling to put his hands on the hood of a car, and when he did not, a struggle ensued.
Justice Department reveals decision not to charge officers in Alton Sterling case

So what? He had a gun. So do the cops, and they’re the only ones who commited murder with it, by this account. I don’t see anything here about a person at the scene, or anywhere else, claiming that Sterling robbed them or attacked them. If two hicks with shotguns responded to that call instead of police, and the same events went down, would you still feel the same way? If not, you either don’t believe in equal rights, or have yet to realize the inconsistency of believing a badge changes the nature of the situation.
1. they didn't commit murder--so your point there is worthless
2. it doesn't matter--AS was given lawful orders and he did not comply
3.the man with the red shirt did have a gun and resisted
...so whenever the cops get a call--they should just look around, and if everything is ok, they should leave??? !!!! not talk to anyone?? not investigate??how ridiculous

So 2 men pull up in a car, there is a guy there who is not threatening or hurting or robbing anyone. These two men approach and grab the guy, attempting to chain him up and take him away to a cage. The guy tries to defend himself against these two attackers, so they shoot him dead.

This is the wholly accurate, de-euphemized version of the story. Sounds different when you call things what they are, doesn’t it?

And yet you say no “murder” was committed, because the “law enforcers” gave a “lawful order” and Sterling did not “comply”. A “struggle ensued” which resulted in the officer “discharging his firearm” in a “justified” attempt to “subdue the suspect.”

Investigation need not include attacking a person and attempting to kidnap them. I understand this is all very normal, so we must be able to rise above our cultural paradigm to see the reality of what’s happening here. Officers are just people. If it would be wrong for someone else to do something, then it’s wrong for them to do it.

The reason why I said “hicks” was to evoke an image of people who you would absolutely not see as an authority, and may even think are a little irresponsible. Would it be ok if they did it? Cops do not have different rights than these two people.
 
so the complaint is someone has a gun.....they see AS and should just leave?? they should not investigate?

Yes, investigate, and if there is no present danger, or anyone complaining, the investigation is over. They were attempting to restrain him. Again, I don't know all the facts of the case, but I didn't read anything about a present individual saying he did something wrong against them, or anything about him doing anything wrong when the police arrived.
yes--you just said it--you don't know the facts
...but the people that investigated it and said the cops were justified, do know the facts
case closed ..you have no argument--see below
...so--
1. cops called for someone with a gun wearing a RED shirt selling CDs
At about 12:30 a.m. on July 5, someone called 911 to report that a black man wearing a red shirt and selling CDs had “pulled a pistol” and had a gun in his pocket. Salamoni and Lake responded and saw Sterling, dressed in a red shirt and standing by a table with a stack of CDs.

The encounter lasted less than 90 seconds from that moment until the firing of the final shot. Officers told Sterling to put his hands on the hood of a car, and when he did not, a struggle ensued.
Justice Department reveals decision not to charge officers in Alton Sterling case

So what? He had a gun. So do the cops, and they’re the only ones who commited murder with it, by this account. I don’t see anything here about a person at the scene, or anywhere else, claiming that Sterling robbed them or attacked them. If two hicks with shotguns responded to that call instead of police, and the same events went down, would you still feel the same way? If not, you either don’t believe in equal rights, or have yet to realize the inconsistency of believing a badge changes the nature of the situation.
1. they didn't commit murder--so your point there is worthless
2. it doesn't matter--AS was given lawful orders and he did not comply
3.the man with the red shirt did have a gun and resisted
...so whenever the cops get a call--they should just look around, and if everything is ok, they should leave??? !!!! not talk to anyone?? not investigate??how ridiculous

So 2 men pull up in a car, there is a guy there who is not threatening or hurting or robbing anyone. These two men approach and grab the guy, attempting to chain him up and take him away to a cage. The guy tries to defend himself against these two attackers, so they shoot him dead.

This is the wholly accurate, de-euphemized version of the story. Sounds different when you call things what they are, doesn’t it?

And yet you say no “murder” was committed, because the “law enforcers” gave a “lawful order” and Sterling did not “comply”. A “struggle ensued” which resulted in the officer “discharging his firearm” in a “justified” attempt to “subdue the suspect.”

Investigation need not include attacking a person and attempting to kidnap them. I understand this is all very normal, so we must be able to rise above our cultural paradigm to see the reality of what’s happening here. Officers are just people. If it would be wrong for someone else to do something, then it’s wrong for them to do it.

The reason why I said “hicks” was to evoke an image of people who you would absolutely not see as an authority, and may even think are a little irresponsible. Would it be ok if they did it? Cops do not have different rights than these two people.
it is NOTHING like what you say
so the cops get a call about a guy in a red shirt has a gun/menacing
so they get there, see the guy, and are supposed to leave??!!
sure....
 
Yes, investigate, and if there is no present danger, or anyone complaining, the investigation is over. They were attempting to restrain him. Again, I don't know all the facts of the case, but I didn't read anything about a present individual saying he did something wrong against them, or anything about him doing anything wrong when the police arrived.
yes--you just said it--you don't know the facts
...but the people that investigated it and said the cops were justified, do know the facts
case closed ..you have no argument--see below
...so--
1. cops called for someone with a gun wearing a RED shirt selling CDs
At about 12:30 a.m. on July 5, someone called 911 to report that a black man wearing a red shirt and selling CDs had “pulled a pistol” and had a gun in his pocket. Salamoni and Lake responded and saw Sterling, dressed in a red shirt and standing by a table with a stack of CDs.

The encounter lasted less than 90 seconds from that moment until the firing of the final shot. Officers told Sterling to put his hands on the hood of a car, and when he did not, a struggle ensued.
Justice Department reveals decision not to charge officers in Alton Sterling case

So what? He had a gun. So do the cops, and they’re the only ones who commited murder with it, by this account. I don’t see anything here about a person at the scene, or anywhere else, claiming that Sterling robbed them or attacked them. If two hicks with shotguns responded to that call instead of police, and the same events went down, would you still feel the same way? If not, you either don’t believe in equal rights, or have yet to realize the inconsistency of believing a badge changes the nature of the situation.
1. they didn't commit murder--so your point there is worthless
2. it doesn't matter--AS was given lawful orders and he did not comply
3.the man with the red shirt did have a gun and resisted
...so whenever the cops get a call--they should just look around, and if everything is ok, they should leave??? !!!! not talk to anyone?? not investigate??how ridiculous

So 2 men pull up in a car, there is a guy there who is not threatening or hurting or robbing anyone. These two men approach and grab the guy, attempting to chain him up and take him away to a cage. The guy tries to defend himself against these two attackers, so they shoot him dead.

This is the wholly accurate, de-euphemized version of the story. Sounds different when you call things what they are, doesn’t it?

And yet you say no “murder” was committed, because the “law enforcers” gave a “lawful order” and Sterling did not “comply”. A “struggle ensued” which resulted in the officer “discharging his firearm” in a “justified” attempt to “subdue the suspect.”

Investigation need not include attacking a person and attempting to kidnap them. I understand this is all very normal, so we must be able to rise above our cultural paradigm to see the reality of what’s happening here. Officers are just people. If it would be wrong for someone else to do something, then it’s wrong for them to do it.

The reason why I said “hicks” was to evoke an image of people who you would absolutely not see as an authority, and may even think are a little irresponsible. Would it be ok if they did it? Cops do not have different rights than these two people.
it is NOTHING like what you say
so the cops get a call about a guy in a red shirt has a gun/menacing
so they get there, see the guy, and are supposed to leave??!!
sure....

You’re expressing disbelief at the outlandish suggestion that the police not arrest the guy, but that’s just reactionary indignation because it’s contrary to how you’re used to law enforcement working.

There’s no harm in actually considering my arguments and taking time to address them. I didn’t say they should just leave without making sure everything is OK, but I don’t see any moral cause for attempting to restrain this person.

The fundamental point I want us to consider is whether police have rights that other people don’t have; whether such a thing could be logical or moral. That’s why I ask if it would be justified if regular citizens did what these cops did. Because either it’s OK for anyone to do what they did, no one to do what they did, or cops have a different standard of morality.

There is no other option. I’d like to discuss which you think it is and why.
 
You're 8 times more likely to be shot by a cop than by a terrorist.


4 times more likely to be shot by a cop if you are white, than if you are black.

Police kill more whites than blacks, but minority deaths generate more outrage: analysis

Interesting, I wonder how many cops that shoot whites are black or brown?


No idea.

Cops shoot people because they are either afraid, or power mad.

Race never did have anything to do with it. The race baiting pimps defy reality to push their hatred/
 
what??!! so if the police get an anonymous complaint about a sniper at a Las Vegas hotel, or a shooter at a Parkland school, they should get there and just leave??

"If the complaint was anonymous, then when the police arrived at the scene, if there was no present danger and no one was complaining, they should have left." - Me
so the complaint is someone has a gun.....they see AS and should just leave?? they should not investigate?

Yes, investigate, and if there is no present danger, or anyone complaining, the investigation is over. They were attempting to restrain him. Again, I don't know all the facts of the case, but I didn't read anything about a present individual saying he did something wrong against them, or anything about him doing anything wrong when the police arrived.
yes--you just said it--you don't know the facts
...but the people that investigated it and said the cops were justified, do know the facts
case closed ..you have no argument--see below
...so--
1. cops called for someone with a gun wearing a RED shirt selling CDs
At about 12:30 a.m. on July 5, someone called 911 to report that a black man wearing a red shirt and selling CDs had “pulled a pistol” and had a gun in his pocket. Salamoni and Lake responded and saw Sterling, dressed in a red shirt and standing by a table with a stack of CDs.

The encounter lasted less than 90 seconds from that moment until the firing of the final shot. Officers told Sterling to put his hands on the hood of a car, and when he did not, a struggle ensued.
Justice Department reveals decision not to charge officers in Alton Sterling case

So what? He had a gun. So do the cops, and they’re the only ones who commited murder with it, by this account. I don’t see anything here about a person at the scene, or anywhere else, claiming that Sterling robbed them or attacked them. If two hicks with shotguns responded to that call instead of police, and the same events went down, would you still feel the same way? If not, you either don’t believe in equal rights, or have yet to realize the inconsistency of believing a badge changes the nature of the situation.
but your post is wrong--the cops did not commit murder
 
You're 8 times more likely to be shot by a cop than by a terrorist.

There are nearly 1 Million sworn LEOs in the US. There are more than 100,000 police interactions every day. When was the last time you bumped into a terrorist?
 
You're 8 times more likely to be shot by a cop than by a terrorist.

There are nearly 1 Million sworn LEOs in the US. There are more than 100,000 police interactions every day. When was the last time you bumped into a terrorist?
yes--I've seen about 30,000,000 calls for police assistance not counting traffic stops
and about 900 cop shooting deaths
but some people are blinded by racism/hatred of whites that they can't do basic math
 
"If the complaint was anonymous, then when the police arrived at the scene, if there was no present danger and no one was complaining, they should have left." - Me
so the complaint is someone has a gun.....they see AS and should just leave?? they should not investigate?

Yes, investigate, and if there is no present danger, or anyone complaining, the investigation is over. They were attempting to restrain him. Again, I don't know all the facts of the case, but I didn't read anything about a present individual saying he did something wrong against them, or anything about him doing anything wrong when the police arrived.
yes--you just said it--you don't know the facts
...but the people that investigated it and said the cops were justified, do know the facts
case closed ..you have no argument--see below
...so--
1. cops called for someone with a gun wearing a RED shirt selling CDs
At about 12:30 a.m. on July 5, someone called 911 to report that a black man wearing a red shirt and selling CDs had “pulled a pistol” and had a gun in his pocket. Salamoni and Lake responded and saw Sterling, dressed in a red shirt and standing by a table with a stack of CDs.

The encounter lasted less than 90 seconds from that moment until the firing of the final shot. Officers told Sterling to put his hands on the hood of a car, and when he did not, a struggle ensued.
Justice Department reveals decision not to charge officers in Alton Sterling case

So what? He had a gun. So do the cops, and they’re the only ones who commited murder with it, by this account. I don’t see anything here about a person at the scene, or anywhere else, claiming that Sterling robbed them or attacked them. If two hicks with shotguns responded to that call instead of police, and the same events went down, would you still feel the same way? If not, you either don’t believe in equal rights, or have yet to realize the inconsistency of believing a badge changes the nature of the situation.
but your post is wrong--the cops did not commit murder

This guy didn’t die from the encounter?

Not that this has anything to do with the point at hand...
 
You're 8 times more likely to be shot by a cop than by a terrorist.

There are nearly 1 Million sworn LEOs in the US. There are more than 100,000 police interactions every day. When was the last time you bumped into a terrorist?
yes--I've seen about 30,000,000 calls for police assistance not counting traffic stops
and about 900 cop shooting deaths
but some people are blinded by racism/hatred of whites that they can't do basic math

The drunk down the road has been driving drunk for years, but he only ran over and killed one little girl. Pretty good odds, huh?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top