Two Police Officers Shot In The Head in Compton, California

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,661
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
They're not entitled to anything other than common courtesy and compliance with their lawfully issued commands.
I would submit that they're not entitled to anything but the compliance.

Not police personally, but the societal rules which we all have a hand in creating and that police are charged with enforcing.

Police (most police that is, I can't possibly speak for the other millions or so) aren't concerned with your courtesy or your respect. They only seek your compliance with their lawful directions.

The place to challenge law isn't on the street in an aggressive confrontation with police. The proper place to challenge law is in court.
A bit of preparation, knowledge of one's rights, a visible recorder (audio and/or video) as well as a hidden recorder goes a long way towards being prepared for having to deal with them in court, if one lives long enough to get there.

I am not anti-cop by any stretch of the imagination but I am avidly anti-asshole, irrespective of their profession. When it comes to asshole cops, yeah, that's always a problem for me.

The ACLU has an app you can download on your phone that you can use to record police encounters that transmits the video footage to their secured servers so that even if the cops take your phone over your objection, deletes the footage that you recorded, then you'll still have a copy as well as proof that they destroyed incriminating evidence.

All that being said, as long as the courts keep giving corrupt police officers a pass for behavior that is clearly a violation of our laws, their agency's policies, procedures or code of ethics (assuming one even exists) we'll continue to have these problems.

Oh and as long as they let officers who refer to black people using the N word claim that they are not racists, none of them have any credibility what so ever.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,661
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Since resisting arrest never was punishable by death
People don't get killed for resisting arrest. They get killed for posing a risk to the lives and / or safety of police officers.

Police represent the authority of society, posing a clear and present threat to the lives and safety of the representatives of societal order comes with consequences.

Police have been charged by society to enforce laws enacted by elected legislatures. They have the right to respond with physical force, up to and including deadly force, to protect their lives and their safety.

Priority one for law enforcement officers is, when your shift is over, go home alive.
"I was in fear for my life" is what police officers as well as civilians are taught to claim when having to use deadly force BECAUSE that is the legal requirement which must be met in order to claim self-defense. Yet when the police fail to meet this minimum requirement we see them get absolved of murder anyway, time and time again with everyone pretending that the requirement was met even when the officer was mistaken about his life being at risk, the killings are nonetheless deemed "justifiable".

The police have tons of people looking out for them and their interests as well as one another. They're not entitled to anything other than common courtesy and compliance with their lawfully issued commands. If they want adoration or expect anything beyond that then they're just SOL.
You realize you just hijacked another thread dont you? Although I'm sure you know what you're doing.

Take a look at the IP to get back on track
This is comment #146 above to which I replied while my response is #558. Since there are over 20 pages I haven't read this could be the reason that there are so many comments between fncceo's comment and mine or maybe the moderators combined a couple of the threads.

I know nothing of hijacking of threads or ascertaining IP addresses for specific board members.

View attachment 388326
Who is asertaining the IP addresses of specific board members ???
Death Angel wrote that, I have no idea what he's talking about. He also said I hijacked a thread so I posted the comment I was responding to. I dont' know what happened.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: IM2

fncceo

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2016
Messages
26,444
Reaction score
11,201
Points
950
They're not entitled to anything other than common courtesy and compliance with their lawfully issued commands.
I would submit that they're not entitled to anything but the compliance.

Not police personally, but the societal rules which we all have a hand in creating and that police are charged with enforcing.

Police (most police that is, I can't possibly speak for the other millions or so) aren't concerned with your courtesy or your respect. They only seek your compliance with their lawful directions.

The place to challenge law isn't on the street in an aggressive confrontation with police. The proper place to challenge law is in court.
A bit of preparation, knowledge of one's rights, a visible recorder (audio and/or video) as well as a hidden recorder goes a long way towards being prepared for having to deal with them in court, if one lives long enough to get there.

I am not anti-cop by any stretch of the imagination but I am avidly anti-asshole, irrespective of their profession. When it comes to asshole cops, yeah, that's always a problem for me.

The ACLU has an app you can download on your phone that you can use to record police encounters that transmits the video footage to their secured servers so that even if the cops take your phone over your objection, deletes the footage that you recorded, then you'll still have a copy as well as proof that they destroyed incriminating evidence.

All that being said, as long as the courts keep giving corrupt police officers a pass for behavior that is clearly a violation of our laws, their agency's policies, procedures or code of ethics (assuming one even exists) we'll continue to have these problems.

Oh and as long as they let officers who refer to black people using the N word claim that they are not racists, none of them have any credibility what so ever.
All good ideas. But, the best idea is, comply with police directions.

Every one involved wants things to go as smoothly as possible.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
8,949
Reaction score
943
Points
170
There is not supposed to be outrage when cops are killed. Just ignore and move on. Some lives really don’t matter and they wear a uniform.
Trump is outraged: President Trump Demands Death Penalty for “Animal” Who Ambushed Deputies in L.A. – “Only Way to Stop This!”

Probably, if they're killed, i.e. shoot to kill, while being arrested by police is fine.

 

Leo123

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
4,065
Points
360
This is what BLM has caused.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,661
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Nobody has the right to take the life of another outside of direct actual self defense.
Agree, but being a cop comes with constant danger where the possibility of death lurks in every situation. Blacks being given this idea that the law represents the old white order, and that these cop's are exclusively working against them for the old white order is a lie that's getting innocent people killed. Whoever was pumping the lie whether it's Hollywood, the media, Democrat politician's or other has blood on their hands. A huge investigation should begin that includes evidence of these things, and to show the patterns that have led to this problem.
You know what, before I saw this news story, I read two others - the first about the police brutalizing (beating to a bloody pulp) a black man for not having ID on him even though he was a passenger in a vehicle and the second about a police officer tazaring and beating the crap out of a partially disabled male whose disability physically prevented him from being able to comply with the officer's command to put his arm behind him back so that they could cuff him all while the man was trying to explain to the officer that he was unable to comply.

The officer's responses in each of these incidents were completely unreasonable and probably a violation of these men's civil rights. Yet most of you all will immediately defend the action of the police with comments like, "he shouldn't have resisted arrest", "shouldn't have run", "should have done what the police told them to", etc. as if disobedience or not moving quickly enough is justification for the violence and/or death inflicted upon those individuals unfortunate enough to encounter these types of sadistic cops.

As long as there are people working in law enforcement who are unsuitable for this kind of work, we will continue to see these types of incidents. As long as you all and they consider ANY criticism of the ills of the profession as an indictment upon each and every officer we will be unable to make any progress.
Good post, and reasonably written. Here's the problem, yes we have bad actors out there for sure, and guess what ??? White's agree with you that some situations are wrong, and bad cop's need to be dealt with as most of them are, but attempting to try these cases in the media and upon the streets through the use of violence, deception, lies, and the creation of false narratives for political purposes is totally unexceptable. No one is defending bad cop's, and everyone agrees when the evidence shows wrong doing on our law enforcements part.

Now in the case of Floyd, yes we all agreed that the cop went over board, and he went rogue, but Floyd wasn't innocent even though the cop committed a crime in his handling of the situation.

We are just saying in affect, that it's not totally the cop's fault always, otherwise as it is attempted to be played in that way by those with an agenda.

Trust that some of us are smart enough to know the difference on these things, and another thing, always remember that two wrongs never make a right. That seems to escape so many these days, and the next thing we get are innocent people being killed that have absolutely nothing to do with anything. That is unacceptable.
Thank you, I appreciate your comment unfortunately though there are a lot of people defending bad cops right here on this message board. And they're particularly vicious about.

The thing that no one seems to remember or perhaps never learned, is that our Bill of Rights has protection in it for people who are accused of having committed a crime even if they are guilty. Their rights are protected so the fact that they may have committed a crime is irrelevant under our Constitution and the police are not judge, jury and executioners. Their job is to only apprehend the suspect so that he/she may be legally tried by a jury of their peers. The police are not their peers, they're adversaries and when they violate the public trust by abusing the powers that they as sworn officers we granted by the state, that is as egregious if not more so, at least to me, than common criminals running around doing what criminals do.

The guy that killed that pro-law enforcement protestor in Portland was not taken into custody, they lit him up right where they found him allegedly because he was armed.

It's not a crime to be openly armed in Washington state unless you're a prohibited person but even if he violated one of Washington's gun laws the punishment is not summary execution, it's imprisonment and I do realize that they can claim anything they want ("I was in fear for my life", "I thought he had a gun", "he made a sudden movement", etc.). This is exactly one of the things that the protestors are complaining about.

This guy didn't live long enough to be tried for his crimes, yet every time the former cop who killed George Floyd appears in court, they have him wearing a bullet proof vest? Why is that?
 

Leo123

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
4,065
Points
360
Nobody has the right to take the life of another outside of direct actual self defense.
Agree, but being a cop comes with constant danger where the possibility of death lurks in every situation. Blacks being given this idea that the law represents the old white order, and that these cop's are exclusively working against them for the old white order is a lie that's getting innocent people killed. Whoever was pumping the lie whether it's Hollywood, the media, Democrat politician's or other has blood on their hands. A huge investigation should begin that includes evidence of these things, and to show the patterns that have led to this problem.
You know what, before I saw this news story, I read two others - the first about the police brutalizing (beating to a bloody pulp) a black man for not having ID on him even though he was a passenger in a vehicle and the second about a police officer tazaring and beating the crap out of a partially disabled male whose disability physically prevented him from being able to comply with the officer's command to put his arm behind him back so that they could cuff him all while the man was trying to explain to the officer that he was unable to comply.

The officer's responses in each of these incidents were completely unreasonable and probably a violation of these men's civil rights. Yet most of you all will immediately defend the action of the police with comments like, "he shouldn't have resisted arrest", "shouldn't have run", "should have done what the police told them to", etc. as if disobedience or not moving quickly enough is justification for the violence and/or death inflicted upon those individuals unfortunate enough to encounter these types of sadistic cops.

As long as there are people working in law enforcement who are unsuitable for this kind of work, we will continue to see these types of incidents. As long as you all and they consider ANY criticism of the ills of the profession as an indictment upon each and every officer we will be unable to make any progress.
Good post, and reasonably written. Here's the problem, yes we have bad actors out there for sure, and guess what ??? White's agree with you that some situations are wrong, and bad cop's need to be dealt with as most of them are, but attempting to try these cases in the media and upon the streets through the use of violence, deception, lies, and the creation of false narratives for political purposes is totally unexceptable. No one is defending bad cop's, and everyone agrees when the evidence shows wrong doing on our law enforcements part.

Now in the case of Floyd, yes we all agreed that the cop went over board, and he went rogue, but Floyd wasn't innocent even though the cop committed a crime in his handling of the situation.

We are just saying in affect, that it's not totally the cop's fault always, otherwise as it is attempted to be played in that way by those with an agenda.

Trust that some of us are smart enough to know the difference on these things, and another thing, always remember that two wrongs never make a right. That seems to escape so many these days, and the next thing we get are innocent people being killed that have absolutely nothing to do with anything. That is unacceptable.
Thank you, I appreciate your comment unfortunately though there are a lot of people defending bad cops right here on this message board. And they're particularly vicious about.

The thing that no one seems to remember or perhaps never learned, is that our Bill of Rights has protection in it for people who are accused of having committed a crime even if they are guilty. Their rights are protected so the fact that they may have committed a crime is irrelevant under our Constitution and the police are not judge, jury and executioners. Their job is to only apprehend the suspect so that he/she may be legally tried by a jury of their peers. The police are not their peers, they're adversaries and when they violate the public trust by abusing the powers that they as sworn officers we granted by the state, that is as egregious if not more so, at least to me, than common criminals running around doing what criminals do.

The guy that killed that pro-law enforcement protestor in Portland was not taken into custody, they lit him up right where they found him allegedly because he was armed.

It's not a crime to be openly armed in Washington state unless you're a prohibited person but even if he violated one of Washington's gun laws the punishment is not summary execution, it's imprisonment and I do realize that they can claim anything they want ("I was in fear for my life", "I thought he had a gun", "he made a sudden movement", etc.). This is exactly one of the things that the protestors are complaining about.

This guy didn't live long enough to be tried for his crimes, yet every time the former cop who killed George Floyd appears in court, they have him wearing a bullet proof vest? Why is that?
If you resist arrest or you are subject to being detained because you are fighting the police, you will be subdued and, if you present a lethal threat to law enforcement, you will be stoppd by either by non lethal ammo or subjected to non lethal weapons. The 'Bill Of Rights' does not protect criminals.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,661
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Nobody has the right to take the life of another outside of direct actual self defense.
Agree, but being a cop comes with constant danger where the possibility of death lurks in every situation. Blacks being given this idea that the law represents the old white order, and that these cop's are exclusively working against them for the old white order is a lie that's getting innocent people killed. Whoever was pumping the lie whether it's Hollywood, the media, Democrat politician's or other has blood on their hands. A huge investigation should begin that includes evidence of these things, and to show the patterns that have led to this problem.
That's not the facts that blacks have lived under. Look at the stats on Stop and Frisk.

And just for the sake of argument let's say you are right. That doesn't give anyone the right to shoot someone in the back for running away.
I'm sure some white thugs got caught up in stop and frisk also, because the law is blind when it comes to justice on the street.
Did you really mean to imply that white "thugs" shouldn't have been "caught up" in the net laid out to catch non-whites known as Stop & Frisk?
Listen you, if you are having trouble reading and then comprehending my post, then go get you some schooling, and then come back educated enough to properly debate once you understand what it is that you are attempting to manipulate or just don't have enough sense to understand.

I was saying that white thugs were caught up in the stop and frisk just like the blacks were, otherwise meaning that it was targeting thugs whether they were white or black. Of course it is being played as if it was targeting only black's, but I garantee you that it wasn't the case. Everything is about race if black's are caught up in it now, even though most know that no one innocent are being targeted in these stings.

I'm just not sure what the answer is to crime anymore, because the cops are faced with a situation where as if anyone black is caught in a sting, the use of the race card is thrown even if it's the case that a person's color is not being considered in the sting or program like "stop and frisk".

I just use common sense about these things, and I just can't believe that black's are being targeted somehow because of their color, instead of their involvement in crime if it ends up being the case.
I was actually just teasing you but it's okay lol.

Stop & Frisk is still unconstitutional because it profiles and targets people based on their race, ethnicity, etc.

If you only look for crime in black and Hispanic neighborhoods almost all of the criminals you find will be black and Hispanic. If you never look for criminals in white neighborhoods, how many white criminals are you going to find?
 

IM2

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
43,243
Reaction score
9,379
Points
2,070
They're not entitled to anything other than common courtesy and compliance with their lawfully issued commands.
I would submit that they're not entitled to anything but the compliance.

Not police personally, but the societal rules which we all have a hand in creating and that police are charged with enforcing.

Police (most police that is, I can't possibly speak for the other millions or so) aren't concerned with your courtesy or your respect. They only seek your compliance with their lawful directions.

The place to challenge law isn't on the street in an aggressive confrontation with police. The proper place to challenge law is in court.
A bit of preparation, knowledge of one's rights, a visible recorder (audio and/or video) as well as a hidden recorder goes a long way towards being prepared for having to deal with them in court, if one lives long enough to get there.

I am not anti-cop by any stretch of the imagination but I am avidly anti-asshole, irrespective of their profession. When it comes to asshole cops, yeah, that's always a problem for me.

The ACLU has an app you can download on your phone that you can use to record police encounters that transmits the video footage to their secured servers so that even if the cops take your phone over your objection, deletes the footage that you recorded, then you'll still have a copy as well as proof that they destroyed incriminating evidence.

All that being said, as long as the courts keep giving corrupt police officers a pass for behavior that is clearly a violation of our laws, their agency's policies, procedures or code of ethics (assuming one even exists) we'll continue to have these problems.

Oh and as long as they let officers who refer to black people using the N word claim that they are not racists, none of them have any credibility what so ever.
All good ideas. But, the best idea is, comply with police directions.

Every one involved wants things to go as smoothly as possible.
We do not have to comply with unlawful directions so the best thing is to fire and blacklist police shown to have abused their power.
 

Leo123

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
4,065
Points
360
I was actually just teasing you but it's okay lol.

Stop & Frisk is still unconstitutional because it profiles and targets people based on their race, ethnicity, etc.

If you only look for crime in black and Hispanic neighborhoods almost all of the criminals you find will be black and Hispanic. If you never look for criminals in white neighborhoods, how many white criminals are you going to find?
There are no criminals in white neighborhoods compared to the black 'community' in the Democrat controlled 'inner city.'
 

IM2

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
43,243
Reaction score
9,379
Points
2,070
Nobody has the right to take the life of another outside of direct actual self defense.
Agree, but being a cop comes with constant danger where the possibility of death lurks in every situation. Blacks being given this idea that the law represents the old white order, and that these cop's are exclusively working against them for the old white order is a lie that's getting innocent people killed. Whoever was pumping the lie whether it's Hollywood, the media, Democrat politician's or other has blood on their hands. A huge investigation should begin that includes evidence of these things, and to show the patterns that have led to this problem.
You know what, before I saw this news story, I read two others - the first about the police brutalizing (beating to a bloody pulp) a black man for not having ID on him even though he was a passenger in a vehicle and the second about a police officer tazaring and beating the crap out of a partially disabled male whose disability physically prevented him from being able to comply with the officer's command to put his arm behind him back so that they could cuff him all while the man was trying to explain to the officer that he was unable to comply.

The officer's responses in each of these incidents were completely unreasonable and probably a violation of these men's civil rights. Yet most of you all will immediately defend the action of the police with comments like, "he shouldn't have resisted arrest", "shouldn't have run", "should have done what the police told them to", etc. as if disobedience or not moving quickly enough is justification for the violence and/or death inflicted upon those individuals unfortunate enough to encounter these types of sadistic cops.

As long as there are people working in law enforcement who are unsuitable for this kind of work, we will continue to see these types of incidents. As long as you all and they consider ANY criticism of the ills of the profession as an indictment upon each and every officer we will be unable to make any progress.
Good post, and reasonably written. Here's the problem, yes we have bad actors out there for sure, and guess what ??? White's agree with you that some situations are wrong, and bad cop's need to be dealt with as most of them are, but attempting to try these cases in the media and upon the streets through the use of violence, deception, lies, and the creation of false narratives for political purposes is totally unexceptable. No one is defending bad cop's, and everyone agrees when the evidence shows wrong doing on our law enforcements part.

Now in the case of Floyd, yes we all agreed that the cop went over board, and he went rogue, but Floyd wasn't innocent even though the cop committed a crime in his handling of the situation.

We are just saying in affect, that it's not totally the cop's fault always, otherwise as it is attempted to be played in that way by those with an agenda.

Trust that some of us are smart enough to know the difference on these things, and another thing, always remember that two wrongs never make a right. That seems to escape so many these days, and the next thing we get are innocent people being killed that have absolutely nothing to do with anything. That is unacceptable.
Thank you, I appreciate your comment unfortunately though there are a lot of people defending bad cops right here on this message board. And they're particularly vicious about.

The thing that no one seems to remember or perhaps never learned, is that our Bill of Rights has protection in it for people who are accused of having committed a crime even if they are guilty. Their rights are protected so the fact that they may have committed a crime is irrelevant under our Constitution and the police are not judge, jury and executioners. Their job is to only apprehend the suspect so that he/she may be legally tried by a jury of their peers. The police are not their peers, they're adversaries and when they violate the public trust by abusing the powers that they as sworn officers we granted by the state, that is as egregious if not more so, at least to me, than common criminals running around doing what criminals do.

The guy that killed that pro-law enforcement protestor in Portland was not taken into custody, they lit him up right where they found him allegedly because he was armed.

It's not a crime to be openly armed in Washington state unless you're a prohibited person but even if he violated one of Washington's gun laws the punishment is not summary execution, it's imprisonment and I do realize that they can claim anything they want ("I was in fear for my life", "I thought he had a gun", "he made a sudden movement", etc.). This is exactly one of the things that the protestors are complaining about.

This guy didn't live long enough to be tried for his crimes, yet every time the former cop who killed George Floyd appears in court, they have him wearing a bullet proof vest? Why is that?
If you resist arrest or you are subject to being detained because you are fighting the police, you will be subdued and, if you present a lethal threat to law enforcement, you will be stoppd by either by non lethal ammo or subjected to non lethal weapons. The 'Bill Of Rights' does not protect criminals.
Since resisting arrest is not the issue, looking for excuses to justify cops murdering people is only going to get more police shot.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,661
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Nobody has the right to take the life of another outside of direct actual self defense.
Agree, but being a cop comes with constant danger where the possibility of death lurks in every situation. Blacks being given this idea that the law represents the old white order, and that these cop's are exclusively working against them for the old white order is a lie that's getting innocent people killed. Whoever was pumping the lie whether it's Hollywood, the media, Democrat politician's or other has blood on their hands. A huge investigation should begin that includes evidence of these things, and to show the patterns that have led to this problem.
You know what, before I saw this news story, I read two others - the first about the police brutalizing (beating to a bloody pulp) a black man for not having ID on him even though he was a passenger in a vehicle and the second about a police officer tazaring and beating the crap out of a partially disabled male whose disability physically prevented him from being able to comply with the officer's command to put his arm behind him back so that they could cuff him all while the man was trying to explain to the officer that he was unable to comply.

The officer's responses in each of these incidents were completely unreasonable and probably a violation of these men's civil rights. Yet most of you all will immediately defend the action of the police with comments like, "he shouldn't have resisted arrest", "shouldn't have run", "should have done what the police told them to", etc. as if disobedience or not moving quickly enough is justification for the violence and/or death inflicted upon those individuals unfortunate enough to encounter these types of sadistic cops.

As long as there are people working in law enforcement who are unsuitable for this kind of work, we will continue to see these types of incidents. As long as you all and they consider ANY criticism of the ills of the profession as an indictment upon each and every officer we will be unable to make any progress.
Good post, and reasonably written. Here's the problem, yes we have bad actors out there for sure, and guess what ??? White's agree with you that some situations are wrong, and bad cop's need to be dealt with as most of them are, but attempting to try these cases in the media and upon the streets through the use of violence, deception, lies, and the creation of false narratives for political purposes is totally unexceptable. No one is defending bad cop's, and everyone agrees when the evidence shows wrong doing on our law enforcements part.

Now in the case of Floyd, yes we all agreed that the cop went over board, and he went rogue, but Floyd wasn't innocent even though the cop committed a crime in his handling of the situation.

We are just saying in affect, that it's not totally the cop's fault always, otherwise as it is attempted to be played in that way by those with an agenda.

Trust that some of us are smart enough to know the difference on these things, and another thing, always remember that two wrongs never make a right. That seems to escape so many these days, and the next thing we get are innocent people being killed that have absolutely nothing to do with anything. That is unacceptable.
Thank you, I appreciate your comment unfortunately though there are a lot of people defending bad cops right here on this message board. And they're particularly vicious about.

The thing that no one seems to remember or perhaps never learned, is that our Bill of Rights has protection in it for people who are accused of having committed a crime even if they are guilty. Their rights are protected so the fact that they may have committed a crime is irrelevant under our Constitution and the police are not judge, jury and executioners. Their job is to only apprehend the suspect so that he/she may be legally tried by a jury of their peers. The police are not their peers, they're adversaries and when they violate the public trust by abusing the powers that they as sworn officers we granted by the state, that is as egregious if not more so, at least to me, than common criminals running around doing what criminals do.

The guy that killed that pro-law enforcement protestor in Portland was not taken into custody, they lit him up right where they found him allegedly because he was armed.

It's not a crime to be openly armed in Washington state unless you're a prohibited person but even if he violated one of Washington's gun laws the punishment is not summary execution, it's imprisonment and I do realize that they can claim anything they want ("I was in fear for my life", "I thought he had a gun", "he made a sudden movement", etc.). This is exactly one of the things that the protestors are complaining about.

This guy didn't live long enough to be tried for his crimes, yet every time the former cop who killed George Floyd appears in court, they have him wearing a bullet proof vest? Why is that?
If you resit arrest or you are subject to being detained because you are fighting the police, you will ber subdued and if you present a lethal threat to law enforcement you will be shot. The 'Bill Of Rights' does not protect criminals.
Well if I should happen to get shot by a rogue asshole cop for merely existing or being armed then I'm make sure that you are the first person my family comes looking for.

Now back to the topic as to why you all are so stupid. The Bill of Right absolutely protects criminals although they are not considered criminals until they are convicted. Who do you think the Sixth Amendment is referring to when it mentions "the accused"?
 

IM2

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
43,243
Reaction score
9,379
Points
2,070
I was actually just teasing you but it's okay lol.

Stop & Frisk is still unconstitutional because it profiles and targets people based on their race, ethnicity, etc.

If you only look for crime in black and Hispanic neighborhoods almost all of the criminals you find will be black and Hispanic. If you never look for criminals in white neighborhoods, how many white criminals are you going to find?
There are no criminals in white neighborhoods compared to the black 'community.'
70 percent of the arrests annually are of whites. That means there are criminals in the white community.
 

Leo123

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
10,548
Reaction score
4,065
Points
360
Well if I should happen to get shot by a rogue asshole cop for merely existing or being armed then I'm make sure that you are the first person my family comes looking for.

Now back to the topic as to why you all are so stupid. The Bill of Right absolutely protects criminals although they are not considered criminals until they are convicted. Who do you think the Sixth Amendment is referring to when it mentions "the accused"?
Why would you 'happen to' be shot by a rogue asshole cop? Are you a felon or something?
 

IM2

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
43,243
Reaction score
9,379
Points
2,070
Well if I should happen to get shot by a rogue asshole cop for merely existing or being armed then I'm make sure that you are the first person my family comes looking for.

Now back to the topic as to why you all are so stupid. The Bill of Right absolutely protects criminals although they are not considered criminals until they are convicted. Who do you think the Sixth Amendment is referring to when it mentions "the accused"?
Why would you 'happen to' be shot by a rogue asshole cop? Are you a felon or something?
Police have been shooting innocent people.
 

Dagosa

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
730
Points
198
Ok..........the troll is running out of right turns to flame.................which his purpose.........

Be sure to spay and nueter a liberal today......so they can't breed more stupid people............
The majority of Leftist men considering they are nearly ALL Vegans now and OD on Soy should have DIFFICULTY breeding thank goodness as the Soy produces Estrogen in males and lowers their Sperm Count to nearly ZERO and so thank goodness all those Leftist men are basically shooting blanks now.
Thought the largest importer and consumer of soy beans was China. Does not seem to have effected their ability to reproduce.
Yeah, gotta agree with you on the Soy myth.
There is not supposed to be outrage when cops are killed. Just ignore and move on. Some lives really don’t matter and they wear a uniform.
Thank the nra for the proliferation of guns where anyone can buy one anytime, anywhere.
No, thank you for the fall of the family unit and respect for others. Thank you for a selfish society where your needs come before others. Thank you for a world where two parents aren’t needed or wanted. Blaming one organization for making all the guns available is plain stupid and moronic. Guns were readily available in this country long before there was an NRA.
Yes.
Too many on the left have a serious flaw and it dictates their behavior. Psychologist cal it Moral Narcissism.
in addition, it appears many on the left are suffering from mental disorders layered on top of that.
Please, denying science during a pandemic and climate change is morally reprehensible. The GOP and TrumpHole and you Humpers need to look in the mirror when it comes to mental disorders. You have complete disregard for people or, you’re just ignorant. Take your choice. What are you ?
Off topic
It’s off topic for you when you have no response. You guys are frauds lying about the the left. Your denial of science and facts show mentally deficiency . Your typical “off topic” response is a further indication how limited you are mentally.
It is off topic anyway Dago, even if I agree. The top is "Two Police Officers Shot In The Head in Compton, California"
Then you should be whining to the post I responded to.
 

fncceo

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2016
Messages
26,444
Reaction score
11,201
Points
950
We do not have to comply with unlawful directions
The problem with that approach, many people, most in fact, aren't very knowledgeable about the law. They are apt to believe anything they've seen on a cop show.

That can result in a violent resist.
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
21,290
Reaction score
4,039
Points
215
Nobody has the right to take the life of another outside of direct actual self defense.
Agree, but being a cop comes with constant danger where the possibility of death lurks in every situation. Blacks being given this idea that the law represents the old white order, and that these cop's are exclusively working against them for the old white order is a lie that's getting innocent people killed. Whoever was pumping the lie whether it's Hollywood, the media, Democrat politician's or other has blood on their hands. A huge investigation should begin that includes evidence of these things, and to show the patterns that have led to this problem.
That's not the facts that blacks have lived under. Look at the stats on Stop and Frisk.

And just for the sake of argument let's say you are right. That doesn't give anyone the right to shoot someone in the back for running away.
I'm sure some white thugs got caught up in stop and frisk also, because the law is blind when it comes to justice on the street.
Did you really mean to imply that white "thugs" shouldn't have been "caught up" in the net laid out to catch non-whites known as Stop & Frisk?
Listen you, if you are having trouble reading and then comprehending my post, then go get you some schooling, and then come back educated enough to properly debate once you understand what it is that you are attempting to manipulate or just don't have enough sense to understand.

I was saying that white thugs were caught up in the stop and frisk just like the blacks were, otherwise meaning that it was targeting thugs whether they were white or black. Of course it is being played as if it was targeting only black's, but I garantee you that it wasn't the case. Everything is about race if black's are caught up in it now, even though most know that no one innocent are being targeted in these stings.
Don't tell me anything about reading comprehension and then say something like this. No one, absolutely no one said it targeted only blacks. The statement was that it overwhelmingly targeted blacks.

Of those people stopped citywide over the four-year period, 81 percent were black or Latino. Racial disproportionality existed in both high-crime and low-crime precincts; it occurred in neighborhoods with a majority of black and Latino residents and also, in some cases, neighborhoods that were mostly white. The numbers showed that a large majority of the time police stopped people who were not engaging in unlawful activity, given that officers neither made an arrest nor issued a summons following the stop.

Police Stops Still Overwhelmingly Target Black And Latino New Yorkers


I'm just not sure what the answer is to crime anymore, because the cops are faced with a situation where as if anyone black is caught in a sting, the use of the race card is thrown even if it isn't the case that a person's color is considered in the sting or program like "stop and frisk". I just use common sense about these things, and I just can't believe that black's are being targeted because of their color instead of their involvement in crime if it ends up being the case.
Color was considered.

a large majority of the time police stopped people who were not engaging in unlawful activity, given that officers neither made an arrest nor issued a summons following the stop.
If it overwhelmingly targeted blacks, then tell me why that was ??? I garantee you that it isn't written anywhere in the description of the program that it would or should overwhelmingly target black's in the program, so who wrote that, and are they being accurate in saying such a thing ??
If you stop eight minorities and two white's what is the crime rate going to look like?

It also has to be considered upon where the program was deployed, and was the area a high crime area that just so happened to be a majority black area ?? Was it deployed targeting color or was it deployed targeting crime ???
The article I posted covered that. I have to assume you didn't read it.
Ok I didn't read it, so mine are questions. Care to answer them ??
No. The answers are in the link.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top