'#ShootThePolice': Crazed man's online ranting before executing two NYPD officers, committing sui

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Is every revolution that human beings have ever fought just "anarchy?"

This attitude is interesting to me. During the American Revolutionary War, only 3% of the population actively supported the revolution. The other 97% sympathized with British rule using the same exact arguments as every person in this thread arguing for the police.

all im saying is we never hear about the 10,000+ officers who actually do their jobs. there are hundreds of cops in any one state who we are never even aware of, from birth to death. because they did their job right.

i dont trust the american public anymore than i do the cops that protect or arrest them. i dont trust american media anymore than i do the cops who are vilified by them. i think that if we had the opportunity to get ourselves three steps ahead by putting someone else out of the game for good, we would.

so forgive me if revolution isnt the first solution to spring to my mind.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: vonclod



Well I know for a fact what was done to Mr. Garner

would not have the same results on myself or you.

So no you're wrong and this is how close a grand jury

would get to an indictment. What you and I have just

done right here, which is not even close.



So only complete ignorance believes there is a grievence

in the matter. There isn't one at all.

If those officers would have half the amount of respect you are displaying right now then no choke hold would have happened. Sure his health played a role in his death but a simple exchange of reasoning in a situation that was non violent could have very well taken a better turn. He was out numbered and the chances of him harming anyone was extremely slim and an opticle and mental assessment done on scene would leed any rational person to see another way out.

When you have 15+ citizens claiming hands up dont shoot was the reality of the day then it becomes necessary not to discredit all them in a closed gj hearing but to charge the officer and have the facts come out in open court then if it becomes clear that 15+ people lied and that is proven then you charge them. However having all this done behind closed doors only increases the chance for corruption to run its coarse unavaded by the public eye. Wlison lied and his remarks have been proven untrue.

a reply to: TzarChasm

I don't think many are claiming that leo's do not do their job but that their job role has been hijacked by bs laws that increase a hundred thousand per year. I think we all agree that cops know how to follow the rules but the rules have become to far from reality to be effective in the manner that is required to keep our freedom and liberty. Most people at some point would see this and seperate themselves from the strings that bind them but what we have is embracment of failed policies.

a reply to: TzarChasm

all im saying is we never hear about the 10,000+ officers who actually do their jobs. there are hundreds of cops in any one state who we are never even aware of, from birth to death. because they did their job right.

And "just doing their job" includes enforcing despotic laws. We have just become desensitized to the fact that many of our laws are tyrannical.

i dont trust the american public anymore than i do the cops that protect or arrest them. i dont trust american media anymore than i do the cops who are vilified by them. i think that if we had the opportunity to get ourselves three steps ahead by putting someone else out of the game for good, we would.

Then you don't really trust anyone and there is no reason to do anything.

so forgive me if revolution isnt the first solution to spring to my mind.

It is not, and was not, our first solution. All of our other solutions are failing because no one is listening.

Just ask Eric Garner.

a reply to: deadeyedick

I don't disagree with anything you just wrote. But just
the same one could add that if Mr. Garner would have
simply complied with the officers? All of this could've
been avoided. And Garner was no novice to the game.
Arrested many times before and instead of going thru
the wheel as I call it ( arrested arraigned and released
usually about three days in jail ). He's dead. So Garner
has to be responsible for his very poor and unwise
decisions that led right up to his untimely death.
Do you think Garner would've jumped in the ring for the
WWF? What would be the results of that poor decision if
he did?

a reply to: randyvs
Well we wil have to agree to disagree..the hold whether or not it resulted in injury to whomever is still an illegal hold. At the least he should be given reprimand for it. I will add the reason such holds are not legal is because of what happend and has happened in the past. I wasn't on the grand jury so I have no idea how the case was presented..I think its fairly common for prosecutors to not really want to punish the police in general. Good bad or indifferent.

I agree with some sentiments here involving the police(as I see it) having not much accountability.. but I in no way think 2 cops in their car deserved anything bad to happen to them..they could of easily been good cops. I have learned on here(still learning) to not stereotype(Im trying hard). A few LEO's here..one for sure showed me some error in my thinking..it was something Im thankful for. Im still a shmuck sometimes anyway.

a reply to: vonclod

Don't get me wrong now. I believe your arguement is
completely valid. Just not in these two examples. So if
you are a smuck? It's for something I know nothing about.

a reply to: randyvs
Lol, I have been too quick at times to jump on the cop hater bandwagon, I have been wrong a few times. Just a personal observation about myself not relating to our specific conversation.

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

*Sorry it took so long for me to respond, but I had a lot of replies to go through.

I understand that you don't need the police to protect you. When I am off duty I don't depend on them to protect me either.

Exactly. We shouldn't be relying on the police to protect us. A cop's job is to catch someone that has committed a crime. If someone is attacking me and a police officer voluntarily wants to help me--awesome, I wouldn't try to stop him. But, I don't want them thinking that they can act as my shield.

Taking away my responsibility creates a power vacuum.

"He who receives the benefit should also bear the disadvantage."

As an officer I always tell people that they should own a firearm because most of the time we are minutes away.

And that is exactly the initial point that I was making. We have collectively turned the police force into something that it was never supposed to be.

That being said do you not feel that the police help to keep some sort of order in society?

Yes, police do help to keep order in society.

My major gripe is the fact that so many officers today act like their job entails that they never question the legitimacy of the law that they are enforcing. If some guy on the Supreme Court (state or federal) can make a decision on the constitutionality of a law, then an officer can too.

Officers should have the authority to not enforce tyrannical laws without fear of punishment.

Like drug prohibition. The whole concept is a joke. When you legislate morality you are going to breed disrespect for both the law itself, and the people enforcing the law.

If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so. -Thomas Jefferson

One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. -M.L.K Jr.

Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state becomes lawless and corrupt -Ghandi

Disobedience of unjust laws is an American tradition.

Do you think society would function the same way as it does now with no police? Do you think crime would increase, decrease, or stay the same?

These two questions are hard to answer because I honestly have no idea. People tend to believe that without government society would collapse. Claims for or against anarchy are impossible to measure because we have never seen a truly anarchist society.

a reply to: CloudsTasteMetallic

Just wait until some jack-wad forgets to put their car in park, thereby rolling into yours and damaging a door. (True story, from just last week.) Your insurance company won't be too happy to settle that claim without a police-filed accident report.

Why is car insurance my only recourse?

But sure, go on foaming at the mouth and yelling your macho "We don't need no stinkin cops!" drivel if you wish..

The foam is a medical condition, so that's not entirely fair.

Also, you're attacking my character instead of attacking my arguments. Why do I have to allow the police to protect me if I don't want to? Why does that make me "macho"?

And for the record, I am pro self-defense

Ah, I see, so you're also a "mouth-foaming macho man."

yet not blinded by irrational hatred of authority.

Neither am I. The entire basis for my argument rests on my single premise that a person should have the right to choose. If I do not want to be ruled, then I should have the right to choose not to be ruled.

Also, I stated originally that people are becoming fed up with law enforcement for many reasons. If people are becoming angry to the point that they are attacking police in a vigilante-styled manner, maybe we need to take a step-back and ask ourselves why.

Nothing about any of that is irrational.

There is nothing irrational about my desire to want to be responsible for providing for my own defense.

They are an essential part of society. Unless you'd like to go clean up the blood and guts on the highway after wrecks?

Only cops are capable? Why would you assume that it would bother me? Because it bothers you? That would be awfully subjective.

a reply to: randyvs

Garner in no way done anything to warrent the choke hold. He made zero threatening gestures. If that is what we are all gonna agree is resisting arrest then we will see many more sad stories like these in the op. The only thing garner is responsible for is being accused of selling ciggeretts. Guess how many he had on him at the time of the murder? ZERO

He should have been givin more oppertunity to resist if that is actually what he was doing. You can't just take all the blame away from these officers. because no weapons were present and no resisting took place. Human beings take time to react to things. If a cop tells you i am arresting you and goes for your hands in less than 2 seconds then we have a problem. You simply talk civil to the suspect and give a moment for understanding. Guess what them guys get paid by the hour. What was the rush?

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon
a reply to: NavyDoc

That's illogical. A law against someone stealing your car or breaking into your house is despotic?

Can you please quote me when I said that all US laws are despotic? Because I didn't, I didn't even imply such a thing. This is just a strawman.

Let me be more specific. If you are a Police Officer and you enforce the following:

Drug prohibition laws
Prostitution prohibition laws
civil forfeiture
business permits (if you arrest a business owner for selling products without a license)
motor vehicle licensing
Carry conceal permits (if you arrest someone for carrying a concealed weapon without a permit)
Anti-property-rights-based-codes (if I buy land and build a house on it that isn't "up to code" and the state sends an agent along with the sheriff to enforce said code)
Underage drinking laws/smoking laws (it should be left up to the parents, not the state)
Imminent Domain without just compensation
property taxation
laws against Class III firearms/body armor

...then you are a bad cop (not human being, a person can be a good human being, but still a bad cop). Those are just the laws that spring-to-mind. There are many others. All cops enforce them, so all cops are despots (those are tyrannical laws).

However, not a single one of those laws would exist without the approval of the voting public. If you want to look at the face of tyranny, look in the mirror, look across the street, look next door. Those are the people truly at fault and those are the despots you despise so much.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

I must live in a magical place to be free of "tyrannical" police.

What happened to Gardner was an accident. Gardner had other issue that helped lead to his death, and its not like those cops went out saying "hey, I feel like choking someone to death after my morning Joe".

What happened to these two cops was an intentional execution.

All cops enforce the same despotic laws. That makes them all bad cops.

Drug prohibition
Prostitution prohibition
Civil forfeiture Racketeering for the state (all fines issued for frivolous reasons)
No-knock home invasions without warrant
Enforcing "free speech zones"

Lol yeah and that worked so well for Ron Paul

So I guess with what your saying is, people should be allowed to steal, intimidate, rape and murder because the cops and the laws are despotic?

Wanna know how to not get killed by a cop? First of all, don't be a law breaking dip**** then get an attitude and become aggressive because you got caught. Secondly, if you've done nothing wrong don't be an a** about it by resisting and making a big scene, just go to the magistrate. And lastly, just stop doing stupid stuff.

I haven't had a run in with any police in over a decade. the last time I did, I was stopped for speeding. Yeah, I could have hem hauled and stamped my feet like a baby crying about despotic police infringing on my rights, but instead I decided to be cordial, get it over with and then go to court. And guess what?! It was thrown out.

a reply to: gorsestar

He was wrong for killing anyone, seems he shot his girlfriend then probably found himself in a situation where he knew it was over for him, he took the cause of the protests and the people that actually wanted to exercise civility or opinion and hijacked it, made it into a sum negative for all!

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: Dr1Akula

Really?

Not saying it doesn't happen but you stated "in most cases cops have witnessed bad ones... and are guilty of doing nothing about it."

You focused on a single word, change the word most with the word many or even some, I still have a point.

Do you have sources or statistics to back your claim that of the cops that do witness other cops do bad things they do nothing?

But you also said in the beginning of your post that it does happen, How can anyone assume that those proved bad ones have never acted like that in front of others?

If you believe that most cops witness other cops do bad things would that not mean that most cops are bad?

I didn't say what I believed, I try to find where the generalization comes from.

I've been a cop for a decade and never witnessed another cop commit a crime or violate a persons rights.

I want to believe you but what does that prove? Also it is hard to believe you've never witnessed a cop beating peaceful protesters or spraying chemicals in their face. (it so common where I live)
Policemen are part of the society and since everyone can become one, the possibilities of having a bad one in almost every PD are very high. Just like it would be for every other group of people.
For some PDs beating up a handcuffed man is something they witness everyday.
But from their perspective, they may not see anything wrong about it...
Others may be afraid to speak, or just agree with this tactic of violence towards their social ''enemies'' (immigrants, anarchists, protesters, etc).

I once witnessed 5 cops sitting outside a bar, where one of them took an icecold bucket of water from the bar and throw it to a poor homeless guy slipping in the cold. 2 of them laughed hard, and the others just stood there doing nothing.
For me all 5 of them are scumbags.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
Again not saying bad cops don't exist (because they do), but I think you may be exaggerating.

Since we agree that they do, why aren't they been addressed by the others, and we only learn about them when they are witnessed by the media, that's what I am trying to say.

a reply to: NavyDoc

So you still have the illusion that voting works. Ever heard of the electoral collage? Our votes do not count and both parties have the same goals. The thing is that we have too many laws that never get removed and every person alive breaks the law sometime. Every right you mention we have do not exist any more because it is illegal to hurt politicians when they go against the will of the people.They will not get held accountable after they spend millions telling the public to vote for them and what they stand for then they all cave after elections and the ones that do not cave get spun through the media machine. It is a failed system and most people are ready to hit the reset or we can just go on pretending it is our fault these people lie and make the laws so that they do not get held accountable for their actions.

a reply to: NavyDoc

So you still have the illusion that voting works. Ever heard of the electoral collage? Our votes do not count and both parties have the same goals. The thing is that we have too many laws that never get removed and every person alive breaks the law sometime. Every right you mention we have do not exist any more because it is illegal to hurt politicians when they go against the will of the people.They will not get held accountable after they spend millions telling the public to vote for them and what they stand for then they all cave after elections and the ones that do not cave get spun through the media machine. It is a failed system and most people are ready to hit the reset or we can just go on pretending it is our fault these people lie and make the laws so that they do not get held accountable for their actions.

a reply to: NavyDoc

However, not a single one of those laws would exist without the approval of the voting public. If you want to look at the face of tyranny, look in the mirror, look across the street, look next door. Those are the people truly at fault and those are the despots you despise so much.

I didn't vote in any of those laws, and neither did you.

Pretty sure none of us did.

a reply to: IntroduceALittleIrony

So I guess with what your saying is, people should be allowed to steal, intimidate, rape and murder because the cops and the laws are despotic?

That's pretty much what I've been trying to get at this whole time. Laws against murder, rape, and theft are despotic because their are no victims with those "crimes."

a reply to: IntroduceALittleIrony

Wanna know how to not get killed by a cop? First of all, don't be a law breaking dip**** then get an attitude and become aggressive because you got caught. Secondly, if you've done nothing wrong don't be an a** about it by resisting and making a big scene, just go to the magistrate. And lastly, just stop doing stupid stuff.

No.

Some laws should be encouraged to be broken.