Libs: If Trump talk owns these violent clashes; Then YOUR side owns dead cops.

[jc456]

It's amazing how the left is on their precious campus safe zone soap box saying Trump rhetoric is causing these violent incidents at his rallies. How his insulting words against different groups of people....is fueling the anger and aggression.

Okay. Fair enough. THEN all the anti cop rhetoric your leftist peers have spewed is the cause for all the DEAD COPS. Not skirmishes. Not a little pushing and shoving. Actual dead bodies.

I agree....Trump's words have sparked some anger and some violence. The occasional pushing and shoving. Even a sucker punch!!

You all are right.

And your words have resulted in dead cops. Dozens of them. And many more shot who survived. And countless of them assaulted.

So Trump talking FORCES the leftists to be violent?

it seems the left really are puppets eh? LOL

 

[jc456]

Well Bucky being utterly unable to factually establish his claims that the only reason that deaths have gone down is 'bullet proof vests' takes the wind out of his sails. As he can't prove anything he's said.

While cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable. This despite the fact that the number of cops has gone up. Meaning that the per-capita death rate for cops is even lower.

one dead cop is too many and it is why you are a libturd challenging cop deaths. Sad fk you are. I hope you need one and they never respond. fk you

 

[bucs90]

I love how libs use the "cop deaths 30 year low" stat.

But ignore when I explain how many THOUSANDS of cops who may have been killed....werent...due to the vast distribution of Kevlar vests the past 20 years, huge advances in emergency trauma care, and of course...."militarized" tactics that help cops win the fights more often these days.

 

[Iceweasel]

You make a very good point. Arguing against it would be incredibly hypocritical.

They cant. I agree....some of Trump's rhetoric has caused some pushing and shoving. Even...GASP....a sucker punch.

The lefts rhetoric is resulting in dozens of dead cops. Hundreds shot who survived. Countless assaulted.

What the heck do you expect people to do when it seems cops are out of control and trigger happy? Are the victims of unjustified cop shootings and their supporters supposed to just shut up and let it ride? It isn't "rhetoric" that's getting cops killed. BTW:

Since hitting a peak in the early 1970s with 280 deaths, the number of officer fatalities in the U.S. has been falling. Of the gunfire that killed officers in 2015, the NLEOMF says those 42 deaths "are 26 percent lower than the average of 57 per year for the decade spanning 2000-2009."

Number Of Police Officers Killed By Gunfire Fell 14 Percent In 2015, Study Says

When the number goes over 300 per year, you might have a point...now....you don't!

No, you don't. You are guilty of quote mining. How many lives were saved by better training, tactics and vests? You don't say. I have no problem with cops, like most people. Are you too stupid to understand why that might be?

Liberals refuse to accept responsibility for ANYTHING. It's always somebody else's fault. You go to a rally to stir up shit and cry foul if you get socked. Not long ago everyone would have laughed at such stupidity.

Quote mining?Heh heh heh...On a message board that is quite common I suppose. Looks like I struck gold!

1. We can go on forever speculating about cop's lives being saved by vests and tactics while ignoring the real issue that a lot of bigoted, corrupt cops are causing good cops to be stereotyped along with them. You seem to be too stupid to understand that vests, better training and tactics mean very little to a sniper with a scope training his weapon on a cop issuing a ticket or investigating a traffic accident. If there was a war on cops, the body count would be significantly higher.

2. That catchall moniker, "liberal," is overused and inappropriate. To you anyone who does something you don;t agree with is a "liberal." I doubt if any of the GOP establishment diehards who don't like Trump would
concur with your tunnel vision. Be that as it may, I do feel that attending a Trump rally to disrupt it is not something I would recommend. Those who do so may be among the bravest people I have seen or the most foolhardy. Nevertheless, those patriots bring the dark side of Trump mania to light. The response to them by Trump or his supporters is recorded by the unblinking eye of the camera for all the world to see. Trump's groupies drew first blood. That swooshing sound you hear is not just idle gusts of wind; it is the sound of people withdrawing their votes for a man who cannot handle criticism or opposition well.

Lots of fluff and puff not no real substance there. How many cops have been killed by snipers? That's important to back up if it's a valid point. Yes, you figures ignore every other possible factor. There are nearly a million cops having regular encounters with street tards yet we only see a few, and they get recycled often and freely.

Libs are libs, I'm not sure why you want to run away from it. But going to any rally to stir up shit is only a good idea if you want the ass whooping. And some people do. Imagine the victimhood! He can pass his bloody hankie around the quivering mass of libs in solidarity. It's a bonding experience they will remember long after they've grown up.

 

[Skylar]

Well Bucky being utterly unable to factually establish his claims that the only reason that deaths have gone down is 'bullet proof vests' takes the wind out of his sails. As he can't prove anything he's said.

While cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable. This despite the fact that the number of cops has gone up. Meaning that the per-capita death rate for cops is even lower.

one dead cop is too many and it is why you are a libturd challenging cop deaths. Sad fk you are. I hope you need one and they never respond. fk you

What does 'challenging cop deaths' even mean? Who here supports cops being killed? Quote the poster.

I'm being factual. Cops deaths are near 30 year low. And that's with *way* more police officers than there were before. So the per capita rate of deaths for cops is even lower. If you disagree, tell me why.

But random cursing isn't actually an argument.

 

[Skylar]

I love how libs use the "cop deaths 30 year low" stat.

But ignore when I explain how many THOUSANDS of cops who may have been killed....werent...due to the vast distribution of Kevlar vests the past 20 years, huge advances in emergency trauma care, and of course...."militarized" tactics that help cops win the fights more often these days.

Prove that the reduction in deaths is due to 'kevlar vests and trauma care'.

Remember, you making a claim isn't actually evidence its true. As you don't know what the **** you're talking about.

Show us the evidence that your claim is accurate. As cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable.

 

[bucs90]

I love how libs use the "cop deaths 30 year low" stat.

But ignore when I explain how many THOUSANDS of cops who may have been killed....werent...due to the vast distribution of Kevlar vests the past 20 years, huge advances in emergency trauma care, and of course...."militarized" tactics that help cops win the fights more often these days.

Prove that the reduction in deaths is due to 'kevlar vests and trauma care'.

Remember, you making a claim isn't actually evidence its true. As you don't know what the **** you're talking about.

Show us the evidence that your claim is accurate. As cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable.

Is common sense a good link?

Hey folks....Skykar wants proof that being shot WITH A vest on is less fatal than being shot with no vest on.

Wow Skylar. Wow.

And he wants proof that ER trauma docs are better at saving gunshot victims today than they were in 1985.

Really? You are skeptical of these two things?? REALLY?

 

[Meathead]

Well Bucky being utterly unable to factually establish his claims that the only reason that deaths have gone down is 'bullet proof vests' takes the wind out of his sails. As he can't prove anything he's said.

While cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable. This despite the fact that the number of cops has gone up. Meaning that the per-capita death rate for cops is even lower.

one dead cop is too many and it is why you are a libturd challenging cop deaths. Sad fk you are. I hope you need one and they never respond. fk you

What does 'challenging cop deaths' even mean? Who here supports cops being killed? Quote the poster.

I'm being factual. Cops deaths are near 30 year low. And that's with *way* more police officers than there were before. So the per capita rate of deaths for cops is even lower. If you disagree, tell me why.

But random cursing isn't actually an argument.

What does per capita death of cops mean? Can you back that up? Murder and cops being killed has certainly gone up. Look at Chicago as more thugs kill each other. About 100% this year and we're going into spring.

This is the age of Obama. 8 years of race-pimping and victimology are not without consequences.

Obama is very like Buchanan and Pierce in his inability to reconcile two warring elements in American history.

 

[bucs90]

Ok Skylar.

Estimates are that the mass distribution of vests over the past 30 years (from very few cops to almost every cop) is estimated around 3000 lives.

3000 cops who would be dead...but arent. Mostly since 2001....because 9/11 DHS grants paid for a huge number of the vests issued since then.

 

[Skylar]

I love how libs use the "cop deaths 30 year low" stat.

But ignore when I explain how many THOUSANDS of cops who may have been killed....werent...due to the vast distribution of Kevlar vests the past 20 years, huge advances in emergency trauma care, and of course...."militarized" tactics that help cops win the fights more often these days.

Prove that the reduction in deaths is due to 'kevlar vests and trauma care'.

Remember, you making a claim isn't actually evidence its true. As you don't know what the **** you're talking about.

Show us the evidence that your claim is accurate. As cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable.

Is common sense a good link?

And by 'common sense', you mean you just making shit up and insisting is fact. Like you do is pretty much every thread you participate in on every topic?

Lets use some common sense. 20 years ago, what was the rate of on duty police officers using bullet proof vests? 10 years ago? 5? Today? If your claims are made based on 'common sense', then you'll this information available, verifable and already researched.

If you're just making up numbers as you go along based on jack shit....you'll give us excuses why you can't back anything you claimed.

Like you just did.

 

[bucs90]

In Medical Triumph, Homicides Fall Despite Soaring Gun Violence

And Skylar....trauma care advances save countless gunshot victims.


See? Don't **** with me little boy. You are below my level.

 

[Meathead]

In Medical Triumph, Homicides Fall Despite Soaring Gun Violence

And Skylar....trauma care advances save countless gunshot victims.


See? Don't **** with me little boy. You are below my level.

Skylar is a punk. Don't take too much from showing him up.

 

[bucs90]

I love how libs use the "cop deaths 30 year low" stat.

But ignore when I explain how many THOUSANDS of cops who may have been killed....werent...due to the vast distribution of Kevlar vests the past 20 years, huge advances in emergency trauma care, and of course...."militarized" tactics that help cops win the fights more often these days.

Prove that the reduction in deaths is due to 'kevlar vests and trauma care'.

Remember, you making a claim isn't actually evidence its true. As you don't know what the **** you're talking about.

Show us the evidence that your claim is accurate. As cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable.

Is common sense a good link?

And by 'common sense', you mean you just making shit up and insisting is fact. Like you do is pretty much every thread you participate in on every topic?

Lets use some common sense. 20 years ago, what was the rate of on duty police officers using bullet proof vests? 10 years ago? 5? Today? If your claims are made based on 'common sense', then you'll this information available, verifable and already researched.

If you're just making up numbers as you go along based on jack shit....you'll give us excuses why you can't back anything you claimed.

Like you just did.

Oops Skylar.....see.....you are wrong as usual.

In Medical Triumph, Homicides Fall Despite Soaring Gun Violence

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...ggdMAE&usg=AFQjCNF3GvKO4gSna18oF0mRP817VBlg-A

 

[Skylar]

Well Bucky being utterly unable to factually establish his claims that the only reason that deaths have gone down is 'bullet proof vests' takes the wind out of his sails. As he can't prove anything he's said.

While cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable. This despite the fact that the number of cops has gone up. Meaning that the per-capita death rate for cops is even lower.

one dead cop is too many and it is why you are a libturd challenging cop deaths. Sad fk you are. I hope you need one and they never respond. fk you

What does 'challenging cop deaths' even mean? Who here supports cops being killed? Quote the poster.

I'm being factual. Cops deaths are near 30 year low. And that's with *way* more police officers than there were before. So the per capita rate of deaths for cops is even lower. If you disagree, tell me why.

But random cursing isn't actually an argument.

What does per capita death of cops mean?

That's the rate of officers in the line of duty dying as part of the total number of officers. If there are say, 100 deaths a year and 100,000 officers, the per capita rate of death in the line of duty is 1 in 1000.

If there are 100 deaths a year and 1,000,000 cops, the per capita rate of death would be 1 in 10,000.

Pretty big difference. We have MORE cops now than we did 30 years ago, but numbers of deaths of police in the line of duty near a 30 year low. That means that the risk to an individual officer today is lower than it was 30 years ago.

Which just kicks the shit out of any 'war on cops' horseshit.

And can I back up that we have more cops now than we did 30 years ago? Would you accept the

There are more than 900,000 sworn law enforcement officers now serving in the United States, which is the highest figure ever. About 12 percent of those are female.

National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund: Law Enforcement Facts

"Highest figure ever' about covers it, yes?

And while this report caps out at 2008, it demonstrates a pretty clear direction in terms of the total number of officers:

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hrslleo08st.pdf

 

[bucs90]

Well Bucky being utterly unable to factually establish his claims that the only reason that deaths have gone down is 'bullet proof vests' takes the wind out of his sails. As he can't prove anything he's said.

While cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable. This despite the fact that the number of cops has gone up. Meaning that the per-capita death rate for cops is even lower.

one dead cop is too many and it is why you are a libturd challenging cop deaths. Sad fk you are. I hope you need one and they never respond. fk you

What does 'challenging cop deaths' even mean? Who here supports cops being killed? Quote the poster.

I'm being factual. Cops deaths are near 30 year low. And that's with *way* more police officers than there were before. So the per capita rate of deaths for cops is even lower. If you disagree, tell me why.

But random cursing isn't actually an argument.

What does per capita death of cops mean?

That's the rate of officers in the line of duty dying as part of the total number of officers. If there are say, 100 deaths a year and 100,000 officers, the per capita rate of death in the line of duty is 1 in 1000.

If there are 100 deaths a year and 1,000,000 cops, the per capita rate of death would be 1 in 10,000.

Pretty big difference. We have MORE cops now than we did 30 years ago, but numbers of deaths of police in the line of duty near a 30 year low. That means that the risk to an individual officer today is lower than it was 30 years ago.

Which just kicks the shit out of any 'war on cops' horseshit.

And can I back up that we have more cops now than we did 30 years ago? Would you accept the

There are more than 900,000 sworn law enforcement officers now serving in the United States, which is the highest figure ever. About 12 percent of those are female.

National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund: Law Enforcement Facts

"Highest figure ever' about covers it, yes?

And while this report caps out at 2008, it demonstrates a pretty clear direction in terms of the total number of officers:

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hrslleo08st.pdf

Guess how many were hired as school cops since the late 90s surge of the SRO program?

Boy....this isn't your topic. Beware this debate.

 

[Skylar]

I love how libs use the "cop deaths 30 year low" stat.

But ignore when I explain how many THOUSANDS of cops who may have been killed....werent...due to the vast distribution of Kevlar vests the past 20 years, huge advances in emergency trauma care, and of course...."militarized" tactics that help cops win the fights more often these days.

Prove that the reduction in deaths is due to 'kevlar vests and trauma care'.

Remember, you making a claim isn't actually evidence its true. As you don't know what the **** you're talking about.

Show us the evidence that your claim is accurate. As cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable.

Is common sense a good link?

And by 'common sense', you mean you just making shit up and insisting is fact. Like you do is pretty much every thread you participate in on every topic?

Lets use some common sense. 20 years ago, what was the rate of on duty police officers using bullet proof vests? 10 years ago? 5? Today? If your claims are made based on 'common sense', then you'll this information available, verifable and already researched.

If you're just making up numbers as you go along based on jack shit....you'll give us excuses why you can't back anything you claimed.

Like you just did.

Oops Skylar.....see.....you are wrong as usual.

In Medical Triumph, Homicides Fall Despite Soaring Gun Violence

Your article doesn't even mention cops. Let alone attribute to the drop in deaths of police officers to any medical procedure. Here's a much simpler explanation: a smaller percentage of officers are being assaulted every year.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...ggdMAE&usg=AFQjCNF3GvKO4gSna18oF0mRP817VBlg-A

And where, pray tell does your link attribute the reduction in police deaths to body armor?

Remember, you can't even tell me how many officers had body armor in the line of duty 30 years ago, 20 years ago, 10 years ago, 5 years ago....or today. Making any argument COMPARING one to the others laughable. As you have nothing to compare.

You're just making it up as you along.

While cop deaths being a near 30 year low is pretty indisputable.

 

[Skylar]

Well Bucky being utterly unable to factually establish his claims that the only reason that deaths have gone down is 'bullet proof vests' takes the wind out of his sails. As he can't prove anything he's said.

While cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable. This despite the fact that the number of cops has gone up. Meaning that the per-capita death rate for cops is even lower.

one dead cop is too many and it is why you are a libturd challenging cop deaths. Sad fk you are. I hope you need one and they never respond. fk you

What does 'challenging cop deaths' even mean? Who here supports cops being killed? Quote the poster.

I'm being factual. Cops deaths are near 30 year low. And that's with *way* more police officers than there were before. So the per capita rate of deaths for cops is even lower. If you disagree, tell me why.

But random cursing isn't actually an argument.

What does per capita death of cops mean?

That's the rate of officers in the line of duty dying as part of the total number of officers. If there are say, 100 deaths a year and 100,000 officers, the per capita rate of death in the line of duty is 1 in 1000.

If there are 100 deaths a year and 1,000,000 cops, the per capita rate of death would be 1 in 10,000.

Pretty big difference. We have MORE cops now than we did 30 years ago, but numbers of deaths of police in the line of duty near a 30 year low. That means that the risk to an individual officer today is lower than it was 30 years ago.

Which just kicks the shit out of any 'war on cops' horseshit.

And can I back up that we have more cops now than we did 30 years ago? Would you accept the

There are more than 900,000 sworn law enforcement officers now serving in the United States, which is the highest figure ever. About 12 percent of those are female.

National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund: Law Enforcement Facts

"Highest figure ever' about covers it, yes?

And while this report caps out at 2008, it demonstrates a pretty clear direction in terms of the total number of officers:

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hrslleo08st.pdf

Guess how many were hired as school cops since the late 90s surge of the SRO program?

Boy....this isn't your topic. Beware this debate.

Laughing....talk to me about it AFTER you back up your claim factually. As your only source on the topic...is yourself. And you don't know what the **** you're talking about.

 

[bucs90]

I love how libs use the "cop deaths 30 year low" stat.

But ignore when I explain how many THOUSANDS of cops who may have been killed....werent...due to the vast distribution of Kevlar vests the past 20 years, huge advances in emergency trauma care, and of course...."militarized" tactics that help cops win the fights more often these days.

Prove that the reduction in deaths is due to 'kevlar vests and trauma care'.

Remember, you making a claim isn't actually evidence its true. As you don't know what the **** you're talking about.

Show us the evidence that your claim is accurate. As cop deaths being near a 30 year low is pretty much indisputable.

Is common sense a good link?

And by 'common sense', you mean you just making shit up and insisting is fact. Like you do is pretty much every thread you participate in on every topic?

Lets use some common sense. 20 years ago, what was the rate of on duty police officers using bullet proof vests? 10 years ago? 5? Today? If your claims are made based on 'common sense', then you'll this information available, verifable and already researched.

If you're just making up numbers as you go along based on jack shit....you'll give us excuses why you can't back anything you claimed.

Like you just did.

Oops Skylar.....see.....you are wrong as usual.

In Medical Triumph, Homicides Fall Despite Soaring Gun Violence

Your article doesn't even mention cops. Let alone attribute to the drop in deaths of police officers to any medical procedure. Here's a much simpler explanation: a smaller percentage of officers are being assaulted every year.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...ggdMAE&usg=AFQjCNF3GvKO4gSna18oF0mRP817VBlg-A

And where, pray tell does your link attribute the reduction in police deaths to body armor?

Remember, you can't even tell me how many officers had body armor in the line of duty 30 years ago, 20 years ago, 10 years ago, 5 years ago....or today. Making any argument COMPARING one to the others laughable. As you have nothing to compare.

You're just making it up as you along.

While cop deaths being a near 30 year low is pretty indisputable.

So you missed the part where they said 3000 cops lives have been saved and in 1999 the Feds began funding mass distribution of vests for cops?? Yeah assumed you missed it.

 

[bucs90]

How bout that folks.

Skylar doesn't believe that more vests will mean fewer deaths.

Hey Skylar....maybe you can explain WHY our military lost vastly more troops in Vietnam than Iraq? Surely better equipment, tactics and trauma care aren't factors right?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Pick one...the list of violence by Trump psychos is extensive

post one

Remember you said that people should be confronted physically if they were physically attacking someone or "in their face" because you're about to make up a new reason right now



There, now heres the part where you imagine something the girl being pushed around did something to deserve it

not sure what it is you're trying to show with that. that was thirty seconds? hahahhahahaahahhahahahaha, epic fail bubba. but i expect nothing more from you.

also, you must be football fan, where only the retaliation is caught on tape.

So you dont see this video is your new thing?

i didn't see anything in the video that is anything of what you stated, so where's the video?

Your eyesight problem isn't my burden. You don't see it because of your unconditional support for Trump. Of that happening ed at an democrat event you'd see it then.