Two Police Officers Shot In The Head in Compton, California

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
781
Reaction score
759
Points
883
Location
Arizona
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?
If you have ten officers to reduce crime, do you send them into the neighborhood that has a hundred violent crimes a day, or the neighborhood that has one violent crime a day? In my opinion you police the area with the most violent crime so as to protect the most people regardless of color. If the police pulled out of black neighborhoods, abandoning them to the criminals, you'd be the first to scream racism because they were just protecting white people.
 

Andylusion

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
20,039
Reaction score
5,499
Points
290
Location
Central Ohio
do have a right to resist an unlawful arrest. Before long everyone will understand that. Its why the founders incorporated the 2nd Amendment.
You’d better not take that advice. Resisting arrest is itself a crime. FU and your second amendment. It has no place when it comes to a cop performing his duty. You’d better not resist by producing a weapon. Terrible post. The time to resist any arrest is by filing a complaint or instituting a suit after the fact. You’re giving stupid advice.
Resisting an illegal arrest is not a crime. Yes forever the cops would arrest you for that but when we have proof that the arrest was not lawful the charges get dropped. We are going to stop that practice. The cops are going to learn what they can and what they can not do or they are going to continue to lose their jobs.

Poor people can not afford to file lawsuits. I have never understood those who believe that paying people millions and millions dollars a year in settlements is a better system than proper police training.
Animal---not bright enough to know that you are forcing the US to make a choice to either allow criminals and their supporters to terrorize cops and their communities as you suggest or to go back to common sense---if you resist arrest, you should expect to be shot.

Resisting arrest is a crime idgit-----and sorry but all of these cases that blm keep putting are up are cases of violent criminals resisting lawful arrests------think you have been unfairly arrested, tell it to the judge. Refuse to be arrested, get shot.
Who taught you (erroneously) that you can shoot someone for simply committing a crime or resisting arrest? Because neither is true.
If commit felony assault on another human being, and then try to run from the law after resisting arrest, then the officers is to assume by all the facts of the case that he has to make a quick decision, and that decision is to stop the perp before he gets away to hurt another innocent person just like he did prior to the officer attempting to arrest him for it. How many criminals have gotten away to only repeat offend again and again ?? Do you think that if a maximum security prison break occurs, that the posse is going to beg the rapist murderer to just walk on back to the prison if they give them cake and ice cream ???

The police are being set up in some cases, by those wanting to aid and abed crimals based upon a skin color now, and that's not working. Why not "all lives matter", and why not rally for all supposed innocent's regardless of skin color when they come in contact with the laws being upheld by the police ?? Where are all the smart phone camera's when people of other colors are being stopped by the law ??? Do black's only care about black lives ??? Oh there's plenty of pain to go around for people of all colors, because we aren't perfect, and we will come into contact with that good cop or not so good cop sooner or later. What should we do ?? Remain calm, and obey the officers commands in order to keep them and us safe. We all want to go home to our families including them.
If the person is running away they no longer are posing an imminent threat, therefore the threat to which one could claim self-defense no longer exists. To shoot them in the back as they are attempting to flee if the crime for which they were being arrested for is a misdemeanor and they are unarmed would not be lawful.

And just for the record most black people that I know are not only concerned about black lives, although for many that may be the main focus. If you don't insist that the laws be followed in regards to the rights of others then you have no right to be upset or demand that they are when it comes to your own rights.
And then that guy gets away from the police, and shoots their ex-girlfriend, and you complain "Police are killing harmless people, and not stopping the criminals."

That's the problem with left-wingers. They don't want to police to stop criminals they know about, until those criminals murder and harm people, and then they ask "why didn't the police stop them when they knew about it?

Absolutely stupid.

As far as I'm concerned, shoot them in the back, front, side, whatever. Just kill the criminals.
 

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
781
Reaction score
759
Points
883
Location
Arizona
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.
Whether an order is lawful or unlawful is for a court to decide. The only smart thing to do when confronted by a cop to to obey his orders and let the lawyers sort it out afterwards. If a cop is out to get you for some reason, not obeying him just plays into his hands and gives him legal justification to use force to compel you to obey.
 

Andylusion

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
20,039
Reaction score
5,499
Points
290
Location
Central Ohio
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?
If you have ten officers to reduce crime, do you send them into the neighborhood that has a hundred violent crimes a day, or the neighborhood that has one violent crime a day? In my opinion you police the area with the most violent crime so as to protect the most people regardless of color. If the police pulled out of black neighborhoods, abandoning them to the criminals, you'd be the first to scream racism because they were just protecting white people.
Yeah, that's the other side. They attack and scream at police, so the police leave high crime areas, and only protect areas with low crime already, which tend to be white areas.

Then they scream that's racists as well.

Reminds me of the Disney Mulan crap.

I had some idiots screaming about how they were using cheap labor.

I finally just told them....

You guys scream and yell when they go to another country, with a different culture and standards, that have different labor laws, and scream they are not following US laws that they don't have.

But if Disney had made that movie here, you would be screaming they were white washing it, and racists, and cultural appropriation, and on and on....

So I don't care. As far as I'm concerned, let the officers shoot every single criminal, from any angle. As long as the criminals are dead.
 

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
781
Reaction score
759
Points
883
Location
Arizona
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.
I do agree with you that the best thing to do is to fire and blacklist cops who abuse their power. You do that by going through the courts, not by making an ass of yourself on the side of the road.
 

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
781
Reaction score
759
Points
883
Location
Arizona
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.
Actually it does. You need to learn it.
Actually...you do. The Bill of Rights guarantees a fair trial to those accused of crimes.
It does not guarantee accused criminals the right to resist arrest or fight and attack police, many of who are black themselves.
And it does not guarantee the right to murder police or set cities on fire.

You're a less than brilliant threat to society and like a mad dog you should be put down.
It does give you that right if the cops have no legal reason to demand you do something.
What right is that? And where and when are cops illegally ordering people to do things?
You aren't a serious person.
Al he had to do was to identify himself and be civil and he'd have been on his way in minutes. Instead he made an ass of himself and would up in jail.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,347
Reaction score
1,655
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
You had to go back FOUR YEARS for one controversial case where the officer was found not guilty.

Come up with thousands for it to be relevant compared to tens of millions of contacts between the police and civilians.
Well in order to come up with the thousand you're requesting we'd have to count all of them in the last half century and if you're bitching about someone losing their life 4 years ago in a case that I can't for the life of me understand why you see as controversial, I can already hear the screaming and gnashing of teeth about how we had to resort to pulling cases from the time of Moses to make our point.
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
21,159
Reaction score
3,969
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.
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.
Actually it does. You need to learn it.
Actually...you do. The Bill of Rights guarantees a fair trial to those accused of crimes.
It does not guarantee accused criminals the right to resist arrest or fight and attack police, many of who are black themselves.
And it does not guarantee the right to murder police or set cities on fire.

You're a less than brilliant threat to society and like a mad dog you should be put down.
It does give you that right if the cops have no legal reason to demand you do something.
What right is that? And where and when are cops illegally ordering people to do things?
You aren't a serious person.
Al he had to do was to identify himself and be civil and he'd have been on his way in minutes. Instead he made an ass of himself and would up in jail.
And he's going to get a huge settlement for having his civil rights violated.

All the cops needed to do was respect his rights.
 

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
781
Reaction score
759
Points
883
Location
Arizona
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.
So many black lives would be spared if they would just remember this
Telll that to Travon Martin, Michael Brown and Jacob Blake. But this is two Deputies being ambush. This was the act of a coward.
Martin attacked another person without provocation and according to an independent witness was trying to kill his victim by slamming his head onto a concrete walkway. Brown attacked a police officer AFTER attacking a store clerk and walking down the middle of a street. Again his conduct was confirmed by independent witnesses.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,347
Reaction score
1,655
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.
In a thread about the attempted Assassination of 2 police officers by a Coward..........this punk ass poster tries to explain how to get evidence the Police.

Trying to BLAME SHIFT the narrative to POLICE ARE EVIL.

The scumbag........who did this..........encouraged by assholes like this poster......needs to be blown away......I don't even care if that short thing is a kid.............he shot both in the head at point blank range.

Take your narrative and stick it where the sun doesn't shine.........don't like It.......I really don't care......BLM and Antifa are Terrorists......and encourage this along with a DNC and MSM who have blood on their hands.
Well you just fucked up.
Yawn
Yeah, I thought as much.
Did it hurt you. Thinking......was painful I'm sure.
Not as much as having made a threat of violence against me is going to hurt you.
 

eagle1462010

Diamond Member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
48,543
Reaction score
16,137
Points
2,250
The left have sucessfully diverted this thread away from the asshole who tried to assassinate 2 officers while they were sitting in their car.

It is a tactic.........to put you on the defensive about something else.....and how you are at fault for it while not talking about a POS who shot those 2.............

I hope they find the little shit and string his ass up.........now that is back on topic.
 

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
781
Reaction score
759
Points
883
Location
Arizona
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.
Actually it does. You need to learn it.
Actually...you do. The Bill of Rights guarantees a fair trial to those accused of crimes.
It does not guarantee accused criminals the right to resist arrest or fight and attack police, many of who are black themselves.
And it does not guarantee the right to murder police or set cities on fire.

You're a less than brilliant threat to society and like a mad dog you should be put down.
It does give you that right if the cops have no legal reason to demand you do something.
What right is that? And where and when are cops illegally ordering people to do things?
You aren't a serious person.
Al he had to do was to identify himself and be civil and he'd have been on his way in minutes. Instead he made an ass of himself and would up in jail.
And he's going to get a huge settlement for having his civil rights violated.

All the cops needed to do was respect his rights.
No, he won't get a dime out of a court settlement. In most, of not all, states you have a legal responsibility to identify yourself to a police officer upon request. The city may pay him a pittance to make this go away, but he doesn't have legal leg to stand on.
 

eagle1462010

Diamond Member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
48,543
Reaction score
16,137
Points
2,250
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.
In a thread about the attempted Assassination of 2 police officers by a Coward..........this punk ass poster tries to explain how to get evidence the Police.

Trying to BLAME SHIFT the narrative to POLICE ARE EVIL.

The scumbag........who did this..........encouraged by assholes like this poster......needs to be blown away......I don't even care if that short thing is a kid.............he shot both in the head at point blank range.

Take your narrative and stick it where the sun doesn't shine.........don't like It.......I really don't care......BLM and Antifa are Terrorists......and encourage this along with a DNC and MSM who have blood on their hands.
Well you just fucked up.
Yawn
Yeah, I thought as much.
Did it hurt you. Thinking......was painful I'm sure.
Not as much as having made a threat of violence against me is going to hurt you.
STFU........I made a generic message.........grow up.

I'm sure you called the FBI or whatever......I really don't care that your feelings got hurt......

My post didn't even get removed.......so OH WELL.

This is about a coward tryin g to execute 2 police officers, and you are diverting........oh well.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,347
Reaction score
1,655
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?
If you have ten officers to reduce crime, do you send them into the neighborhood that has a hundred violent crimes a day, or the neighborhood that has one violent crime a day? In my opinion you police the area with the most violent crime so as to protect the most people regardless of color. If the police pulled out of black neighborhoods, abandoning them to the criminals, you'd be the first to scream racism because they were just protecting white people.
Why do you all keep wrongfully asserting that there is no crime in the white areas? And the fact that in the vast majority of the cases of Stop & Frisk, the police found no contraband indicates that they were just phishing (profiling)
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
21,159
Reaction score
3,969
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.
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.
Actually it does. You need to learn it.
Actually...you do. The Bill of Rights guarantees a fair trial to those accused of crimes.
It does not guarantee accused criminals the right to resist arrest or fight and attack police, many of who are black themselves.
And it does not guarantee the right to murder police or set cities on fire.

You're a less than brilliant threat to society and like a mad dog you should be put down.
It does give you that right if the cops have no legal reason to demand you do something.
What right is that? And where and when are cops illegally ordering people to do things?
You aren't a serious person.
Al he had to do was to identify himself and be civil and he'd have been on his way in minutes. Instead he made an ass of himself and would up in jail.
And he's going to get a huge settlement for having his civil rights violated.

All the cops needed to do was respect his rights.
No, he won't get a dime out of a court settlement. In most, of not all, states you have a legal responsibility to identify yourself to a police officer upon request. The city may pay him a pittance to make this go away, but he doesn't have legal leg to stand on.
It gets old replying to people about something that they don't even bother to read the article or chooses to be dishonest about it.
 

beagle9

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
25,957
Reaction score
4,846
Points
280
do have a right to resist an unlawful arrest. Before long everyone will understand that. Its why the founders incorporated the 2nd Amendment.
You’d better not take that advice. Resisting arrest is itself a crime. FU and your second amendment. It has no place when it comes to a cop performing his duty. You’d better not resist by producing a weapon. Terrible post. The time to resist any arrest is by filing a complaint or instituting a suit after the fact. You’re giving stupid advice.
Resisting an illegal arrest is not a crime. Yes forever the cops would arrest you for that but when we have proof that the arrest was not lawful the charges get dropped. We are going to stop that practice. The cops are going to learn what they can and what they can not do or they are going to continue to lose their jobs.

Poor people can not afford to file lawsuits. I have never understood those who believe that paying people millions and millions dollars a year in settlements is a better system than proper police training.
Animal---not bright enough to know that you are forcing the US to make a choice to either allow criminals and their supporters to terrorize cops and their communities as you suggest or to go back to common sense---if you resist arrest, you should expect to be shot.

Resisting arrest is a crime idgit-----and sorry but all of these cases that blm keep putting are up are cases of violent criminals resisting lawful arrests------think you have been unfairly arrested, tell it to the judge. Refuse to be arrested, get shot.
Who taught you (erroneously) that you can shoot someone for simply committing a crime or resisting arrest? Because neither is true.
If commit felony assault on another human being, and then try to run from the law after resisting arrest, then the officers is to assume by all the facts of the case that he has to make a quick decision, and that decision is to stop the perp before he gets away to hurt another innocent person just like he did prior to the officer attempting to arrest him for it. How many criminals have gotten away to only repeat offend again and again ?? Do you think that if a maximum security prison break occurs, that the posse is going to beg the rapist murderer to just walk on back to the prison if they give them cake and ice cream ???

The police are being set up in some cases, by those wanting to aid and abed crimals based upon a skin color now, and that's not working. Why not "all lives matter", and why not rally for all supposed innocent's regardless of skin color when they come in contact with the laws being upheld by the police ?? Where are all the smart phone camera's when people of other colors are being stopped by the law ??? Do black's only care about black lives ??? Oh there's plenty of pain to go around for people of all colors, because we aren't perfect, and we will come into contact with that good cop or not so good cop sooner or later. What should we do ?? Remain calm, and obey the officers commands in order to keep them and us safe. We all want to go home to our families including them.
So why are blacks four times as likely to be stopped and three times is likely to be arrested and put in prison although there is little evidence they are more criminal than whites. Black gangsters of course are very busy killing each other over who gets to sell drugs to whites from the suburbs and the sticks.
Little evidence meaning you ain't sure, but there is evidence to suggest it eh ??? Look here, that bullcrap has been beat to death around here, so I ain't gonna relive it all again for you. Now catch up in life.
 

beagle9

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
25,957
Reaction score
4,846
Points
280
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?
If you have ten officers to reduce crime, do you send them into the neighborhood that has a hundred violent crimes a day, or the neighborhood that has one violent crime a day? In my opinion you police the area with the most violent crime so as to protect the most people regardless of color. If the police pulled out of black neighborhoods, abandoning them to the criminals, you'd be the first to scream racism because they were just protecting white people.
Why do you all keep wrongfully asserting that there is no crime in the white areas? And the fact that in the vast majority of the cases of Stop & Frisk, the police found no contraband indicates that they were just phishing (profiling)
Why don't you go into Chicago with your BlM signs a blazing, and tell those inner city gangs that they got to quit acting up, because thems white folks gets nervous when they keep a acting up ???
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,347
Reaction score
1,655
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
do have a right to resist an unlawful arrest. Before long everyone will understand that. Its why the founders incorporated the 2nd Amendment.
You’d better not take that advice. Resisting arrest is itself a crime. FU and your second amendment. It has no place when it comes to a cop performing his duty. You’d better not resist by producing a weapon. Terrible post. The time to resist any arrest is by filing a complaint or instituting a suit after the fact. You’re giving stupid advice.
Resisting an illegal arrest is not a crime. Yes forever the cops would arrest you for that but when we have proof that the arrest was not lawful the charges get dropped. We are going to stop that practice. The cops are going to learn what they can and what they can not do or they are going to continue to lose their jobs.

Poor people can not afford to file lawsuits. I have never understood those who believe that paying people millions and millions dollars a year in settlements is a better system than proper police training.
Animal---not bright enough to know that you are forcing the US to make a choice to either allow criminals and their supporters to terrorize cops and their communities as you suggest or to go back to common sense---if you resist arrest, you should expect to be shot.

Resisting arrest is a crime idgit-----and sorry but all of these cases that blm keep putting are up are cases of violent criminals resisting lawful arrests------think you have been unfairly arrested, tell it to the judge. Refuse to be arrested, get shot.
Who taught you (erroneously) that you can shoot someone for simply committing a crime or resisting arrest? Because neither is true.
If commit felony assault on another human being, and then try to run from the law after resisting arrest, then the officers is to assume by all the facts of the case that he has to make a quick decision, and that decision is to stop the perp before he gets away to hurt another innocent person just like he did prior to the officer attempting to arrest him for it. How many criminals have gotten away to only repeat offend again and again ?? Do you think that if a maximum security prison break occurs, that the posse is going to beg the rapist murderer to just walk on back to the prison if they give them cake and ice cream ???

The police are being set up in some cases, by those wanting to aid and abed crimals based upon a skin color now, and that's not working. Why not "all lives matter", and why not rally for all supposed innocent's regardless of skin color when they come in contact with the laws being upheld by the police ?? Where are all the smart phone camera's when people of other colors are being stopped by the law ??? Do black's only care about black lives ??? Oh there's plenty of pain to go around for people of all colors, because we aren't perfect, and we will come into contact with that good cop or not so good cop sooner or later. What should we do ?? Remain calm, and obey the officers commands in order to keep them and us safe. We all want to go home to our families including them.
If the person is running away they no longer are posing an imminent threat, therefore the threat to which one could claim self-defense no longer exists. To shoot them in the back as they are attempting to flee if the crime for which they were being arrested for is a misdemeanor and they are unarmed would not be lawful.

And just for the record most black people that I know are not only concerned about black lives, although for many that may be the main focus. If you don't insist that the laws be followed in regards to the rights of others then you have no right to be upset or demand that they are when it comes to your own rights.
And then that guy gets away from the police, and shoots their ex-girlfriend, and you complain "Police are killing harmless people, and not stopping the criminals."

That's the problem with left-wingers. They don't want to police to stop criminals they know about, until those criminals murder and harm people, and then they ask "why didn't the police stop them when they knew about it?

Absolutely stupid.

As far as I'm concerned, shoot them in the back, front, side, whatever. Just kill the criminals.
And this is the ignorance that we have to deal with that results in the million dollar payouts by the cities to the families of the people they have wrongfully killed.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,347
Reaction score
1,655
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?
If you have ten officers to reduce crime, do you send them into the neighborhood that has a hundred violent crimes a day, or the neighborhood that has one violent crime a day? In my opinion you police the area with the most violent crime so as to protect the most people regardless of color. If the police pulled out of black neighborhoods, abandoning them to the criminals, you'd be the first to scream racism because they were just protecting white people.
Why do you all keep wrongfully asserting that there is no crime in the white areas? And the fact that in the vast majority of the cases of Stop & Frisk, the police found no contraband indicates that they were just phishing (profiling)
Why don't you go into Chicago with your BlM signs a blazing, and tell those inner city gangs that they got to quit acting up, because thems white folks gets nervous when they keep a acting up ???
Why don't you? What are you so afraid of?
 

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
781
Reaction score
759
Points
883
Location
Arizona
Wow, Tucker Carlson’s take on this was amazing. Will post video when it’s up.

The female was shot through the jaw, and was helping the other officer. All while several animals in the area were streaming them and laughing at them.

Do black people think this makes them look good?
Do whites think it makes them look good to defend police shooting an unarmed man 7 times in the back then trying to lie about him going for a gun?
As i understand it, ti wasn't his car, it was the kid's mother's car and he had just stolen the keys and attacked her. What would be saying now if the cops had let him go and he had attacked the kids? My guess is you'd be blaming the cops for letting him go.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top