Dems want Laws changed after Rittenhouse shootings. Are vigilantes the answer? (Poll)

[JoeB131]

Cops need to defend themselves from blood-thirsty vicious criminals every day. However, there are a few bad cops that take advantage. The new body cameras and iPhone videos referee a lot of incidents.
I'm amazed about that one cop who rolled up on a girl fight, one had a knife, and he had to make a split-second decision to shoot or let the knifing happen...no wonder cops are going to GOP areas.

You're welcome to them.

But let's review this statement. American Police shoot 1000 people a year. Compare that to any other G-7 nations, where those numbers are rarely single or low double digits. Now this would be fine, if there was a constant threat to officer lives, and you can even make that argument in a country as gun-happy as this one is.

In 2021, 61 officers were killed by gunfire. This is a terrible number, but hardly justifies shooting 1000 people a year, many of whom don't have guns. By comparison, 323 Officers died of Covid-19. You know, the disease your side insists doesn't actually exist. (Seriously, Mormon Bob insists it's a hoax, which is funny given his whole religion is a hoax.) So you are far more likely to die of Covid than a bullet, but the police unions are fighting vaccination mandates.

They are also fighting body-cam mandates. If Cameras would justify most police shootings, you would think the cops would WELCOME them, not oppose them.

Now, since we are talking about the cop who shot a 15 year old girl who HAD CALLED THEM FOR HELP when other teenagers were beating her up, when that cop shot her, not only were onlookers angry he did it, but even the other cops were looking at him like 'What the fuck did you do?"

 

[kyzr]

But let's review this statement. American Police shoot 1000 people a year. Compare that to any other G-7 nations, where those numbers are rarely single or low double digits. Now this would be fine, if there was a constant threat to officer lives, and you can even make that argument in a country as gun-happy as this one is.

They are also fighting body-cam mandates. If Cameras would justify most police shootings, you would think the cops would WELCOME them, not oppose them.

Now, since we are talking about the cop who shot a 15 year old girl who HAD CALLED THEM FOR HELP when other teenagers were beating her up, when that cop shot her, not only were onlookers angry he did it, but even the other cops were looking at him like 'What the fuck did you do?"

1. True US cops shoot about 1000 criminals annually. You failed to mention that 314 police officers were shot in 2021, thru November. Compare that 314 officers shot number to G-7 nations. No comparison. US criminals are armed and much more dangerous.

2. We disagree about that cop who shot the knife wielding girl. The girl in pink whose life was saved was very grateful. The shooting was totally justified.

Ohio officials release more body cam video of fatal police shooting of Black teen and urge community to await the facts | CNN

Columbus, Ohio, officials released additional body camera video on Wednesday of a police officer fatally shooting a Black teen who charged two females with a knife.

www.cnn.com

3. The police do welcome body cameras. Got any links to the contrary?

Local police officers welcome body cams, but only if Illinois rules are fair and funded

Body Cameras a Welcome Investment for Minnesota Police

The Worthington Police Department has had the ability to record police interactions with the public via dashboard cameras since the mid-’90s, but the new body-worn units will offer an additional perspective.

www.govtech.com

Mississippi cops welcome body cameras

Many law officials in the Magnolia State say they really don't see that many drawbacks to having cameras in place on an officer's person, rather than just in his or her patrol car.

www.clarionledger.com

 

[Bob Blaylock]

And while I kind of despise your cult, most Mormons I've met are nowhere near as vile racists as you are.

You keep projecting your own racism on me, yet you have never been able to point to a single thing that I have ever said or written, that supports the notion that any person should be judged or treated differently from another on the basis of race, And you will never be able to do so, because I have never believed any such thing, and I have never expressed any such thing.

In the mean time, you are constantly conflating criminality with race, in order to push the bullshit premise that being opposed to allowing criminals free reign to prey on human beings is somehow racist; showing everyone that you are, in fact, the true racist.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Bullshit. If someone is desperate enough to commit a crime, they aren't going to be easily dissuaded by a white guy waving a gun around. They certainly aren't going to learn the error of their ways and stop committing crimes. To hear the gun fetishists tell it, there are more DGU's than actual crimes.

If displaying a gun doesn't stop a criminal from preying on a human being, then the next step, discharging that gun into the criminal, very likely will. And if the former were really as ineffective as you claim that it is, then there would be a lot more cases than there are of the latter.

It is notable that although nobody else mentioned race in the sequence to which you are responding, you right away inserted race into your account, as if to suggest that the situation of a white human being defending himself from a black criminal is any different from that of a black human being defending himself from a white criminal.

One again, it is you who is falsely conflating race with criminality, or with the need to defend against criminality, showing who the true racist is, here.

The distinction between criminals and human beings has nothing whatsoever to do with race, and everything to do with choices and behavior. I think you're the only one participating in this thread who doesn't recognize this simple, obvious truth. For that matter, you're one of very few who refuse to acknowledge the difference between human beings and criminals.

 

[JoeB131]

1. True US cops shoot about 1000 criminals annually. You failed to mention that 314 police officers were shot in 2021, thru November. Compare that 314 officers shot number to G-7 nations. No comparison. US criminals are armed and much more dangerous.

Except the number is shot and killed, not shot. Only 61 cops were shot and killed last year, compared to 1000 Americans, not all of them criminals. Like the girl who was hiding in a dressing room when a cop shot a suspect and it went through him through the wall and killed her.

Yes, American criminals ARE armed, because the NRA has flooded our streets with guns and takes no responsibility for them.

2. We disagree about that cop who shot the knife wielding girl. The girl in pink whose life was saved was very grateful. The shooting was totally justified.

There are a dozen ways that cop could have subdued the girl without shooting her.

3. The police do welcome body cameras. Got any links to the contrary?

Why the Chicago Police Union is Fighting City Over Body Cameras

Chicago’s largest police union is fighting the use of body cameras. Fraternal Order of Police President Kevin Graham explains why.

news.wttw.com

New York City Police Union Fights Body Cameras, Despite Their Benefits | 10-8 Video Systems

The New York City Police Union is fighting the movement, despite the advantages of police body cameras.

www.10-8video.com

Police Union Pushes Back on Body Cameras in El Paso, Texas

Union leaders say policies and privacy concerns must be addressed before the technology is implemented.

www.govtech.com

I could go on... but really, Google is your friend.

 

[JoeB131]

You keep projecting your own racism on me, yet you have never been able to point to a single thing that I have ever said or written, that supports the notion that any person should be judged or treated differently from another on the basis of race, And you will never be able to do so, because I have never believed any such thing, and I have never expressed any such thing.

You are the one who published a picture of a black man stealing alcohol to diminish the many legitimate people who complain about police brutality. HIs pants being down around his ankles was a nice touch.

In the mean time, you are constantly conflating criminality with race, in order to push the bullshit premise that being opposed to allowing criminals free reign to prey on human beings is somehow racist; showing everyone that you are, in fact, the true racist.

Sorry, Bob, most of the cases that BLM is upset about were not criminals. You go after a cop with a gun, I have no sympathy for you. You are the one who assumes that if a black person is killed by the police they MUST be "subhuman Criminal pieces of shit".

My view... none of them were doing anything bad enough to merit the police using deadly force.

If displaying a gun doesn't stop a criminal from preying on a human being, then the next step, discharging that gun into the criminal, very likely will. And if the former were really as ineffective as you claim that it is, then there would be a lot more cases than there are of the latter.

Actually, there are few cases of either, because guns don't really provide much in the way of self-defense. The crook has a plan, and he's desperate. The gun owner is almost always going to hesitate, probably won't even think about going for his gun most of the time. This is why DGU's are utter bullshit.

It is notable that although nobody else mentioned race in the sequence to which you are responding, you right away inserted race into your account, as if to suggest that the situation of a white human being defending himself from a black criminal is any different from that of a black human being defending himself from a white criminal.

No, buddy, you entered race in to this sequence when you published a picture of a black guy stealing to prove that BLM doesn't have valid complaints. So you couldn't find a picture of a white person looting?

The distinction between criminals and human beings has nothing whatsoever to do with race, and everything to do with choices and behavior. I think you're the only one participating in this thread who doesn't recognize this simple, obvious truth. For that matter, you're one of very few who refuse to acknowledge the difference between human beings and criminals.

Actually, a criminal is just a human being who has become desperate... All your whining about criminals comes from a guy who probably is going to sleep in a warm bed with a full belly tonight because of his white privilege.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You are the one who published a picture of a black man stealing alcohol to diminish the many legitimate people who complain about police brutality. HIs pants being down around his ankles was a nice touch.

No, buddy, you entered race in to this sequence when you published a picture of a black guy stealing to prove that BLM doesn't have valid complaints. So you couldn't find a picture of a white person looting?

The color of its skin was not the point.

The point was that it was a subhuman criminal piece of shit “protesting” the fact that once of its fellow subhuman criminal pieces of shit got into a fight with the Police, and lost; by stealing liquor from a merchant who had nothing whatsoever to do with that event.

That particular picture happens to be of a subhuman criminal piece of shit that is black, but it could easily have been white. The color of its skin does not matter. What matters is that by its behavior, it forfeits its humanity and becomes nothing more that a subhuman criminal piece of shit.

For all we know, the merchant from whom it stole that liquor might also be black. But unlike this piece of shit, that merchant, whatever the color of his skin is, is most likely an actual human being, just trying to make an honest living by running a business. You'd surely condemn this merchant as “racist” if he objects to being robbed by this piece of shit, and perhaps even having his store burned down.

Once again, what it all gets down to with you is that because you, yourself, are obviously a subhuman criminal; piece of shit, you will always take the side of your own kind against the side of human beings. Always.

And no matter what the race is of any particular subhuman piece of shit the side of which you take, or whatever the race is of the human beings whose victimization by that shit you defend, you'll nearly always use “racism” as an excuse for defending the behavior of subhuman criminal pieces of shit, and as an excuse to condemn anyone who objects to that behavior.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Actually, a criminal is just a human being who has become desperate...

That's just bullshit. I have a difficult time believing that deep down, you don't know perfectly well that it is bullshit, but then I don't really know what it is like to be completely lacking in a soul, or a sense of right and wrong, as you clearly are. Perhaps you truly are, by lack of these essential elements of humanity, truly incapable of grasping the difference between a human being, and a criminal.

All your whining about criminals comes from a guy who probably is going to sleep in a warm bed with a full belly tonight because of his white privilege.

Again, bullshit.

I sleep in a warm bed because I work hard to earn an honest living to pay for that bed, and the roof above it, and the food in my belly. I know plenty of other people for whom the exact same thing is equally true, and not all of them are white. Several of them, in fact, are black—exactly the race that you seem to think can only survive as criminals. I guess you would call them “Uncle Toms” or some similarly disgusting racist term, while trying to claim that I am the one who is racist. I call them my friends, my neighbors, my colleagues.

 

[JoeB131]

The color of its skin was not the point.

yet that was the picture you chose.... why did you chose that picture?

The point was that it was a subhuman criminal piece of shit “protesting” the fact that once of its fellow subhuman criminal pieces of shit got into a fight with the Police, and lost; by stealing liquor from a merchant who had nothing whatsoever to do with that event.

Actually, you really haven't presented any evidence that individual was participating in a BLM protest or any kind of protest. In fact, I bet if I backtracked the source of that image, I would find it came from a racist website.

That particular picture happens to be of a subhuman criminal piece of shit that is black, but it could easily have been white. The color of its skin does not matter. What matters is that by its behavior, it forfeits its humanity and becomes nothing more that a subhuman criminal piece of shit.

Then why didn't you find one of a white person looting to make your point? you know, instead of going to whatever stormfront site you went to.

For all we know, the merchant from whom it stole that liquor might also be black. But unlike this piece of shit, that merchant, whatever the color of his skin is, is most likely an actual human being, just trying to make an honest living by running a business. You'd surely condemn this merchant as “racist” if he objects to being robbed by this piece of shit, and perhaps even having his store burned down.

Frankly, I don't see selling a product that is unhealthy to an impoverished community as being "healthy".. or that in poorer neighborhoods, it's easier to buy booze than groceries.

And no matter what the race is of any particular subhuman piece of shit the side of which you take, or whatever the race is of the human beings whose victimization by that shit you defend, you'll nearly always use “racism” as an excuse for defending the behavior of subhuman criminal pieces of shit, and as an excuse to condemn anyone who objects to that behavior.

Well, I call it taking responsibility. If you were so keen on proving that it was the looting you objected to, you'd have found pictures of white people breaking the law, but you went where you went, and no one was surprised.

 

[JoeB131]

That's just bullshit. I have a difficult time believing that deep down, you don't know perfectly well that it is bullshit, but then I don't really know what it is like to be completely lacking in a soul, or a sense of right and wrong, as you clearly are. Perhaps you truly are, by lack of these essential elements of humanity, truly incapable of grasping the difference between a human being, and a criminal.

Yeah, the problem is, your "morality" is based on the fear of an imaginary sky fairy, who of course, reflects all of your worst instincts.

When the poor steal, it's called Crime.
When the rich steal, it's called profits.

Right now, we have this Theranos woman on trial. She embezzled millions of dollars from other rich people. Patients actually suffered from her fraud by not getting accurate diagnosis. Yet if she sees the inside of a jail cell, she's probably going to get less time than that guy who knocked over the liquor store for what, $100 worth of booze.

The Theranos Trial Only Cares about the Billionaires Deceived by Elizabeth Holmes and Not the Patients

Paste Magazine is your source for the best music, movies, TV, comedy, videogames, books, comics, craft beer, politics and more. Discover your favorite albums and films.

www.pastemagazine.com

I sleep in a warm bed because I work hard to earn an honest living to pay for that bed, and the roof above it, and the food in my belly. I know plenty of other people for whom the exact same thing is equally true, and not all of them are white. Several of them, in fact, are black—exactly the race that you seem to think can only survive as criminals. I guess you would call them “Uncle Toms” or some similarly disgusting racist term, while trying to claim that I am the one who is racist.

Check your privilege, buddy. I am willing to bet you would have to go back pretty far on your ancestry to find a poor person.

We have plenty of criminals of all races, but yes, we have more black people committing crimes to survive because of institutionalized racism in this country. Black kids get prison, white kids get probation.

A lot of the guys I grew up with got into dumb adolescent trouble... today they all have good jobs, and many of them wear MAGA hats, having no sense of irony.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

yet that was the picture you chose.... why did you chose that picture?

Actually, you really haven't presented any evidence that individual was participating in a BLM protest or any kind of protest. In fact, I bet if I backtracked the source of that image, I would find it came from a racist website.

Then why didn't you find one of a white person looting to make your point? you know, instead of going to whatever stormfront site you went to.

Frankly, I don't see selling a product that is unhealthy to an impoverished community as being "healthy".. or that in poorer neighborhoods, it's easier to buy booze than groceries.

Well, I call it taking responsibility. If you were so keen on proving that it was the looting you objected to, you'd have found pictures of white people breaking the law, but you went where you went, and no one was surprised.

It was a meme that best illustrated the point I intended to make with it. The color of the skin of the subhuman criminal piece of shit depicted in the meme had nothing to do with the point. Of the subhuman criminal piece of shit depicted in the meme were white, the point would have been exactly the same.

And to be honest, I do not know the actual circumstances in which that picture was taken. I just know that it is a common meme, used to illustrate the particular point that I was making.

For all I know, the picture might actually be of an actual human being, who legitimately purchased the liquor he was carrying. Or perhaps it's a staged picture, with that man and the photographer working together to produce a picture for some artistic purpose having nothing to do with the point of the meme in which it has come to be commonly used.

In any event, you're the one who is judging it based on the race of the subject of the picture. I'm judging it by the behavior which, as used in this meme, it is being used to depict.

You're judging by race.

I'm judging by behavior.

And yet I'm the one who is “racist”.

And you wonder why everyone on this forum thinks you're an idiot.

 

[JoeB131]

It was a meme that best illustrated the point I intended to make with it.

I'm sure it was... so why are you running away from your racist intent?

And to be honest, I do not know the actual circumstances in which that picture was taken.

But you presented it as though you did. You don't know if that happened during the Floyd Riots... We do see that everyone in that picture is wearing masks. But the other people in the picture don't appear to be rioting and don't seem particuarly alarmed by what this guy is doing. But I don't know the time or context and neither do you... but you sure presented it like you did.

In any event, you're the one who is judging it based on the race of the subject of the picture. I'm judging it by the behavior which, as used in this meme, it is being used to depict.

I'm not judging it. I am judging YOU. A member of a cult who has said racist things here every day uses a racist picture to illustrate his "point", even though by your own admission, you have no idea of the context of that picture.

you know, as opposed to the hundreds of thousands who came out and protested police misconduct of all races who didn't break anything or steal anything.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I'm sure it was... so why are you running away from your racist intent?

But you presented it as though you did. You don't know if that happened during the Floyd Riots... We do see that everyone in that picture is wearing masks. But the other people in the picture don't appear to be rioting and don't seem particuarly [sic] alarmed by what this guy is doing. But I don't know the time or context and neither do you... but you sure presented it like you did.

I'm not judging it. I am judging YOU. A member of a cult who has said racist things here every day uses a racist picture to illustrate his "point", even though by your own admission, you have no idea of the context of that picture.

you know, as opposed to the hundreds of thousands who came out and protested police misconduct of all races who didn't break anything or steal anything.

You're the one judging that picture by race. You're the one judging everything by race.

You're the one who uses race as an excuse to defend and support the behavior of subhuman criminal pieces of shit (regardless of what the race might actually be of any particular subhuman criminal piece of shit that you are defending) and you are the one who uses race as an excuse to condemn the actions of human beings whenever they oppose the acts of subhuman criminal pieces of shit.

You're the one using race as an excuse to dismiss the very valid point made by that meme. If the meme had depicted a white subhuman criminal piece of shit “protesting” some bullshit cause by robbing a merchant that had nothing to do with that cause, you would surely still find some way to dismiss it as “racist”.

You seem to be fixated on the premise that the distinction between human beings and criminals is somehow inseparable from the distinction between different races. It shows more vividly in this thread, than in most other discussions which you have infested, inasmuch as you have gone to a great deal of effort to paint Mr. Rittenhouse as “racist” for exterminating a couple of subhuman criminal; pieces of shit that attacked him, even though both of those subhuman criminal pieces of shit, as well as one other that he shot that unfortunately survived, were white, just as Mr. Rittenhouse himself is.

I think you are probably the only participant in this entire site who conflates the distinction between human beings and criminals, the way you do with the distinctions between the races.

 

[Dragonlady]

Democrats on the Sunday morning shows, as well as many others want laws changed so that law abiding citizens can't defend themselves from criminals.
In SF gangs of looters emptied Louis Vitton and other high-end stores. What if Louis hired a few armed vigilantes?
In Philadelphia, a mom and baby were killed coming home from a baby shower,
WHERE IS THE DEMOCRAT'S OUTRAGE???????????????.

Pregnant Woman Shot, Killed Returning Home From Her Baby Shower, Philadelphia Police Say

A pregnant woman is dead after a shooting in the Crescentville section of Philadelphia.

philadelphia.cbslocal.com

NYC Mayor DeBlasio said the Rittenhouse verdict "sends a horrible message"...
De Blasio joins NY’s left in raging over Kyle Rittenhouse — as NYPD on alert for potential unrest
“This verdict is disgusting and it sends a horrible message to this country. Where is the justice in this,” de Blasio tweeted after the 18-year-old defendant was cleared of all charges in the deaths of two men and the wounding of a third during racially charged violence in Kenosha, Wisconsin, in 2020."

Biden, Adams, Sharpton and others weigh in on Rittenhouse verdict

The acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse in a Kenosha, Wis., courtroom sparked plenty of opinions on Friday — divided in the same way the country is. The baby-faced gunman, who killed two men and wounded a third at a Black Lives Matter protest last year, was hailed as a hero in right-wing circles...

news.yahoo.com

"Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) tweeted, “It’s time to dismantle systemic racism & fundamentally transform our broken justice system.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom worried about the precedent set by the Rittenhouse case.
“America today: you can break the law, carry around weapons built for a military, shoot and kill people, and get away with it,” the Democrat tweeted. “That’s the message we’ve just sent to armed vigilantes across the nation.”


What if neighborhoods organized vigilantes to shoot criminals in their neighborhoods, today's version of a "well regulated militia"? Would urban gang shootings stop?

Lets take a poll on what should happen when pols and DAs stop police from arresting and prosecuting violent criminals.

Should vigilantes fill the gap and protect neighborhoods from criminals?

[The OP and thread title are now better aligned, sorry for the closure of the first thread discussion]

You have two ridiculous options in your "poll", which is so typical of conservatives. Either you think vigilantes should be able to shoot and kill people in your neighbourhoods, or you think people should be able to rob and steal with impunity.

Apparently, you're not smart enough to think of other options. Like: "No, I think the police should be able to handle these issues. That IS what they're paid to do."; or "Vigilantes will lead to running gun battles in the streets".

 

[AZrailwhale]

The key word was "properly maintained". I was an Armorer in the Army (before I was promoted to Supply NCO). Getting them to maintain their weapons in a chain of command structure was enough of a trick.

More to the point, I am less worried about the gun that has been sitting in someone's closet getting rusty since the Nineties.... Most of the horrific gun crimes are committed with a gun just bought by a crazy person.

I mean, seriously, every time there is a mass shooting, we find out two things. 1) Everyone in that person's life knew he was crazy and 2) It was really easy for him to get a gun.

Private owners take far better care of their firearms than soldiers who do the minimum the armorer will allow.

 

[JoeB131]

You're the one judging that picture by race. You're the one judging everything by race.

I'm not the one who sought out and reposted an openly racist meme... that would be you.

You're the one using race as an excuse to dismiss the very valid point made by that meme. If the meme had depicted a white subhuman criminal piece of shit “protesting” some bullshit cause by robbing a merchant that had nothing to do with that cause, you would surely still find some way to dismiss it as “racist”.

Memes don't have valid points, they are fodder for lazy thinkers.
To the point, though, you admit that you don't know if that picture was related to a demonstration, or if it was stages, or if it was photophopped. You just found a picture that reflected your racist views to use them as a point to denounce the 99% of protesters of all races who went out there and protested peacefully.

You seem to be fixated on the premise that the distinction between human beings and criminals is somehow inseparable from the distinction between different races.

Again, I'm not the one who posted a racist meme, Mormon Bob. You kind of outed your racism, and then when called on it, started whining like a stuck pig.

 

[JoeB131]

It shows more vividly in this thread, than in most other discussions which you have infested, inasmuch as you have gone to a great deal of effort to paint Mr. Rittenhouse as “racist” for exterminating a couple of subhuman criminal; pieces of shit that attacked him, even though both of those subhuman criminal pieces of shit, as well as one other that he shot that unfortunately survived, were white, just as Mr. Rittenhouse himself is.

Quite the contrary.
Mr. Rittenhouse deliberately crossed state lines, acquired a weapon he was not allowed to own in his home state, illegally stayed out after curfew, and then engaged protestors in a threatening manner.

The only person who killed anyone that night was Kyle Rittenhouse. While you might fault Rosenbaum for his part in the confrontation (as much as you can hold a mentally ill person accountable), Huber and Grosskraentz were trying to stop an active shooter. One the police refused to arrest on the spot even though several people in the crowed pointed him out as the guy who just shot three people.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Quite the contrary.
Mr. Rittenhouse deliberately crossed state lines, acquired a weapon he was not allowed to own in his home state, illegally stayed out after curfew, and then engaged protestors in a threatening manner.

The only person who killed anyone that night was Kyle Rittenhouse. While you might fault Rosenbaum for his part in the confrontation (as much as you can hold a mentally ill person accountable), Huber and Grosskraentz were trying to stop an active shooter. One the police refused to arrest on the spot even though several people in the crowed pointed him out as the guy who just shot three people.

Absolute lies.

He was not an active shooter. Nor did he engage anyone in a threatening manner.

He was attacked without provocation and had every right to defend himself

 

[JoeB131]

Absolute lies.

He was not an active shooter. Nor did he engage anyone in a threatening manner.

He was attacked without provocation and had every right to defend himself

So he was right and EVERYONE in that Crowd was wrong?

Got it.

 

[Soupnazi630]

So he was right and EVERYONE in that Crowd was wrong?

Got it.

You should understand being wrong when everyone else is right all the time.