CDZ Cop shootings....It may be a race problem, but it is a cop problem and we need to resolve it

[Vastator]

I am supportive of the Black Lives Matter movement, but I have also maintained that while the issue of police using undue force seems more dire to, for and with blacks, a material part of the problem is the type of people who are sworn onto police forces.

Video of police shooting that killed 6-year-old autistic La. boy released​

As a nation, we need to raise bar for what kinds of characters would be police officers need to have. Additionally, I think that in addition to law enforcement training, cops need to have psychology/sociology training so that they are better able to make equitable, accurate and well informed decisions about the people whom they encounter.

I think too cops need to be trained on how to control/ignore their understandably negative bias toward potential offenders. I think that because it's all but certain that cops, given the nature of their job, are inclined to think "the worst" more so than giving folks the benefit of the doubt. Cops are, however, hired to enforce laws, not pass judgement on folks suspected of breaking them, which is the role of judges and juries. Cops need to learn how to maintain objectively and neutrality in carrying out their duties and in interacting with citizens.

• Building Trust Between the Police and the Citizens They Serve
  
• Life as a Cop The Impacts of Policing on Police Officers: Is Policing a Lifestyle Choice?
  
• POLICE CYNICISM: POLICE SURVIVAL TOOL?
  
• SHEDDING LIGHT ON POLICE CULTURE: AN EXAMINATION OF OFFICERS’ OCCUPATIONAL ATTITUDES
  
• POLICE ATTITUDES: THE IMPACT OF EXPERIENCE AFTER TRAINING
  
• Police Attitudes Toward Abuse of Authority: Findings From a National Study
  
• Police Officers' Decision Making and Discretion: Forming Suspicion and Making a Stop
  
• Police Culture and the Learning Organisation: A Relationship?

Seeing how you don't know what you speak of, you'd make a great politician. But if these stupid negroes would comply with police orders they wouldn't get shot. The ones who don't, and get shot, deserve it.

Yeah. Liberals create more criminals that any inner city ever could, and then they want to neuter the police.

Hell, shoot them too, it's as american as apple pie.

Again... How many times do you need to be reminded...? Apple pie is English. English, Fent. Write it on a sticky, and attach it to your monitor, or something.

 

[320 Years of History]

It isn't a cop problem. It isn't a problem at all. It's a political football exaggerated by the Race Grievance Industry, and the left wing MSM.

WTF?

The Race Grievance Industry. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et.al, who make their living off of the division between the races. There are others, those who make their living off of the division between Hispanics and whites, Native Americans and everyone else, etc., etc. the last thing these people want is for the races to get along. It would mean the end of the gravy train for those people.

america was founded on, built on, and still runs on these divisions that your power structure manufactured and fomented. Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works.

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

 

[PredFan]

It isn't a cop problem. It isn't a problem at all. It's a political football exaggerated by the Race Grievance Industry, and the left wing MSM.

WTF?

The Race Grievance Industry. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et.al, who make their living off of the division between the races. There are others, those who make their living off of the division between Hispanics and whites, Native Americans and everyone else, etc., etc. the last thing these people want is for the races to get along. It would mean the end of the gravy train for those people.

america was founded on, built on, and still runs on these divisions that your power structure manufactured and fomented. Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works.

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

His post was utterly incoherent.

 

[Fenton Lum]

It isn't a cop problem. It isn't a problem at all. It's a political football exaggerated by the Race Grievance Industry, and the left wing MSM.

WTF?

The Race Grievance Industry. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et.al, who make their living off of the division between the races. There are others, those who make their living off of the division between Hispanics and whites, Native Americans and everyone else, etc., etc. the last thing these people want is for the races to get along. It would mean the end of the gravy train for those people.

america was founded on, built on, and still runs on these divisions that your power structure manufactured and fomented. Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works.

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

Revisit Bacon's Rebellion and the aftermath. It all goes back that far.

 

[Fenton Lum]

It isn't a cop problem. It isn't a problem at all. It's a political football exaggerated by the Race Grievance Industry, and the left wing MSM.

WTF?

The Race Grievance Industry. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et.al, who make their living off of the division between the races. There are others, those who make their living off of the division between Hispanics and whites, Native Americans and everyone else, etc., etc. the last thing these people want is for the races to get along. It would mean the end of the gravy train for those people.

america was founded on, built on, and still runs on these divisions that your power structure manufactured and fomented. Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works.

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

His post was utterly incoherent.

I'm sure it is, to the like of you, but I don't pay much heed to what things look like to incoherent folk.

 

[320 Years of History]

It isn't a cop problem. It isn't a problem at all. It's a political football exaggerated by the Race Grievance Industry, and the left wing MSM.

WTF?

The Race Grievance Industry. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et.al, who make their living off of the division between the races. There are others, those who make their living off of the division between Hispanics and whites, Native Americans and everyone else, etc., etc. the last thing these people want is for the races to get along. It would mean the end of the gravy train for those people.

america was founded on, built on, and still runs on these divisions that your power structure manufactured and fomented. Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works.

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

Revisit Bacon's Rebellion and the aftermath. It all goes back that far.

I'm not going to revisit anyone's rebellion and then try to piece together how it somehow connects with those two disjointedly, abstrusely even, eccentric statements you made. You need to post coherent thoughts, be they absurdly derived or not.

 

[320 Years of History]

WTF?

The Race Grievance Industry. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et.al, who make their living off of the division between the races. There are others, those who make their living off of the division between Hispanics and whites, Native Americans and everyone else, etc., etc. the last thing these people want is for the races to get along. It would mean the end of the gravy train for those people.

america was founded on, built on, and still runs on these divisions that your power structure manufactured and fomented. Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works.

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

His post was utterly incoherent.

I'm sure it is, to the like of you, but I don't pay much heed to what things look like to incoherent folk.

Red:
Well, you should. The value of doing so is that you'd have examples of what not to do when expressing your thoughts, even if in paying such attention you don't expressly gain insights about how to construct a coherent sentence or paragraph.

 

[Fenton Lum]

The Race Grievance Industry. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et.al, who make their living off of the division between the races. There are others, those who make their living off of the division between Hispanics and whites, Native Americans and everyone else, etc., etc. the last thing these people want is for the races to get along. It would mean the end of the gravy train for those people.

america was founded on, built on, and still runs on these divisions that your power structure manufactured and fomented. Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works.

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

His post was utterly incoherent.

I'm sure it is, to the like of you, but I don't pay much heed to what things look like to incoherent folk.

Red:
Well, you should. The value of doing so is that you'd have examples of what not to do when expressing your thoughts, even if in paying such attention you don't expressly gain insights about how to construct a coherent sentence or paragraph.

Not here to serve you pard.

 

[320 Years of History]

america was founded on, built on, and still runs on these divisions that your power structure manufactured and fomented. Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works.

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

His post was utterly incoherent.

I'm sure it is, to the like of you, but I don't pay much heed to what things look like to incoherent folk.

Red:
Well, you should. The value of doing so is that you'd have examples of what not to do when expressing your thoughts, even if in paying such attention you don't expressly gain insights about how to construct a coherent sentence or paragraph.

Not here to serve you pard.

If you think your writing coherent sentences serves me, you have another think coming.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

His post was utterly incoherent.

I'm sure it is, to the like of you, but I don't pay much heed to what things look like to incoherent folk.

Red:
Well, you should. The value of doing so is that you'd have examples of what not to do when expressing your thoughts, even if in paying such attention you don't expressly gain insights about how to construct a coherent sentence or paragraph.

Not here to serve you pard.

If you think your writing coherent sentences serves me, you have another think coming.

Why don't you go try to have a nice day.

 

[PredFan]

america was founded on, built on, and still runs on these divisions that your power structure manufactured and fomented. Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works.

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

His post was utterly incoherent.

I'm sure it is, to the like of you, but I don't pay much heed to what things look like to incoherent folk.

Red:
Well, you should. The value of doing so is that you'd have examples of what not to do when expressing your thoughts, even if in paying such attention you don't expressly gain insights about how to construct a coherent sentence or paragraph.

Not here to serve you pard.

Apparently you are only here to rant incoherently, displaying your lack of historical knowledge and inability to use logic.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Blue:
What do those two sentences even mean? The notion that our nation was founded upon the premise of fomenting socially derived discord among the citizenry is preposterous! And to what power structure of PredFan's are you referring to? Of your second sentence which reads, "Then you were pointed at any and all who point out how the system works,"....WTH is that supposed to mean? Just who do you presume "pointed" PredFan anywhere? Of all the directions in which one might be pointed -- physically or cognitively -- "at any and all who point out how the system works" is incoherent as being among them in the context of the sentence that precedes the one containing that absurd phrase.

Did you just finish a course on "how to write complete sentences the substance of which is completely indecipherable?" Is it really asking too much for you to say something specific, clear and that is more than just a one unsubstantiated generalization about "God only knows what?" Are you using some sort of "spy school" communication method whereby what you write must seem incoherent to everyone who reads it except the person who has the key to unlocking the true meaning of the words?

His post was utterly incoherent.

I'm sure it is, to the like of you, but I don't pay much heed to what things look like to incoherent folk.

Red:
Well, you should. The value of doing so is that you'd have examples of what not to do when expressing your thoughts, even if in paying such attention you don't expressly gain insights about how to construct a coherent sentence or paragraph.

Not here to serve you pard.

Apparently you are only here to rant incoherently, displaying your lack of historical knowledge and inability to use logic.

Yes, my views are different than yours, thanks.

 

[Picaro]

One side says 2+2=4, the other says 2+2=6; now, you may look at 'both sides' and find that the 2+2=6 people should be treated as if they have a valid point, but most truly objective people will be happy to go with the 2+2=4 people on this one.

There are many subjects where your analogy is perfectly valid. But this isn't one of them. This situation with cop vs. civilian and black vs. white does not apply to differences in the sum of 2+2. No. There are too many variables, too much history, and too many points of view. This my friend, is in the realm of one side says 2+2=4 and the other says 3+3=6.

The result is the shooting of an innocent citizen in both cases, but the events leading up to it are seen from more than one perspective.

Well, the context is that there is no wave of police shootings, and the numbers are statistically insignificant, yet parrots and astro-turfers still make the claim regardless, indicating they either know they're liars or they're just too ignorant to know what they're talking about. I guess the latter is some sort of 'point of view', but not one worth treating seriously, as in my example.

 

[Picaro]

This situation with cop vs. civilian and black vs. white does not apply to differences in the sum of 2+2. No. There are too many variables.

Well, yes. Context is essential to the matter at hand, as it always is.

“Is everyone who lives in Ignorance like you?" asked Milo.
"Much worse," he said longingly. "But I don't live here. I'm from a place very far away called Context.”
― Norton Juster, The Phantom Tollbooth​

Whenever you're able to provide any, try posting it; so far you haven't.

 

[GLASNOST]

This situation with cop vs. civilian and black vs. white does not apply to differences in the sum of 2+2. No. There are too many variables.

Well, yes. Context is essential to the matter at hand, as it always is.

“Is everyone who lives in Ignorance like you?" asked Milo.
"Much worse," he said longingly. "But I don't live here. I'm from a place very far away called Context.”
― Norton Juster, The Phantom Tollbooth​

Whenever you're able to provide any, try posting it; so far you haven't.

You don't see any difference of context? Hmmmmm ........

...... parrots and astro-turfers ...... they either know they're liars or they're just too ignorant to know what they're talking about.

 

[xyz]

I posted examples of white people being murdered by police in this thread and no ones cares:

Question for all white people on this board

 

[Picaro]

[QUOTE="GLASNOST, post: 15573131, member: 58468]

You don't see any difference of context? Hmmmmm ........[/quote]

Yes, it's obvious you don't know what it is. Now, go back and tell us all about how Democratic Party funders aren't funding BLM, the street gang thugs you and the OP poster are so proud of, and show us this 'big police problem' that doesn't exist except your minds, instead of always steering the topic away from you having to make a case for anything at all, hoping these silly inept attempts at playing semantics makes you appear to be intelligent; they don't, they just make you look like you're lying and playing 'I Touched You Last!!!' games.

 

[GLASNOST]

I posted examples of white people being murdered by police in this thread and no ones cares:

I care. Mucho!

 

[GLASNOST]

Picaro
Familiarize yourself with

rules.

 

[Picaro]

Picaro
Familiarize yourself with

rules.

I am; apparently you aren't. Try not misquoting people and just making troll posts, and respond to the posts you cite instead of whining. If you can't refute what is said, then don't cite them.