character assasinations

Using a persons past to assassinate their character as justification for murder is just plain wrong and more than that it is simplistic, sure there are some people whom capitol punishment applies to....however the majority of people this does not apply ...i am really sick of small minded bigoted people happy to decide other peoples fate based on their own ignorance and understanding ....hell we even see it on this site, there are a group of like minded people who happily push the narrative.....


You know who you are ....just wanted to let you know your hard work does not go unnoticed ....

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

some people have so little character-its kinder to let it die out naturally than kill it

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Nothing can justify murder. People in general jump way too fast to conclusions, based on their ignorance and understanding. I guess this is about something political.

a reply to: verschickter

any statement that opens with the premise :

Nothing can justify ....................

has already doomed itself

moral flexibility FTW

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Using a persons past to assassinate their character as justification for murder is just plain wrong and more than that it is simplistic, sure there are some people whom capitol punishment applies to....however the majority of people this does not apply ...i am really sick of small minded bigoted people happy to decide other peoples fate based on their own ignorance and understanding ....hell we even see it on this site, there are a group of like minded people who happily push the narrative.....


You know who you are ....just wanted to let you know your hard work does not go unnoticed ....

We see it a lot on this site, several times this week already. This is the first time I've flagged a thread as you have said something that needs saying. Kudos.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

But knowing a person's past tells you what kind of person they are.

Like if a person has committed armed robbery and attempted murder before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they are a scumbag and the world is probably just a little better without them spreading they're scumbaggery around.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

People that commit crimes as part of their lifestyle eventually reap what they sow. I can't feel sorry for bad people that get what they have coming to them. Karma eventually finds us all...

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

People that commit crimes as part of their lifestyle eventually reap what they sow. I can't feel sorry for bad people that get what they have coming to them. Karma eventually finds us all...

That may be your experience, mine however karma has been somewhat of a bitch....

People assassinate their own character by their own actions.

I find it slightly ironic you are trying to assassinate ATS members character by making this thread.....

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Using a persons past to assassinate their character as justification for murder is just plain wrong and more than that it is simplistic, sure there are some people whom capitol punishment applies to....however the majority of people this does not apply ...i am really sick of small minded bigoted people happy to decide other peoples fate based on their own ignorance and understanding ....hell we even see it on this site, there are a group of like minded people who happily push the narrative.....


You know who you are ....just wanted to let you know your hard work does not go unnoticed ....

There is a difference between character assassination and evaluating how someone's background could have lead to a volatile situation resulting in themselves or someone else being killed.

Character assassination is calling someone a racist with little to no evidence to support the assertion. You know like how the main stream media does daily with Trump or anyone who tries to disagree with liberals.

On the other hand, when you have a case where a police officer shoots someone and investigators need to piece together what happened after the fact, looking at the backgrounds of the people involved most certainly can help paint a picture of what most likely happened.

For example, if a cop claims he shot a black guy because he pulled a gun on him. There is no clear video of the incident and murky witnesses. The first thing we are going to do is look at the cops background and the victim's background. If the cop has a history of complaints against them, I am most certainly going to take that into consideration just as I am also going to be evaluating the existing of a criminal record for the victim to see the cop's story might hold water.

When a guy has a mile long rap sheet for assault and weapons violations, a convicted felon, and an illegal firearm... I am not going to say they did in fact pull a gun on the police, but odds are the story has legs as the behavior being asserted has a historical basis.

This is not to say that all people with criminal backgrounds remain criminal, but past behavior for the most part is indicative for current behavior. This is not character assassination.

originally posted by: watchitburn
Like if a person has committed armed robbery and attempted murder before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they are a scumbag and the world is probably just a little better without them spreading they're scumbaggery around.

If you murder a stranger, knowing NOTHING about him, then find out later that he had a criminal past, it doesn't justify the act of murdering a perfect stranger. You can TELL yourself it's justified after the fact, but you still murdered someone, knowing nothing about him.

When an armed man is shot and killed by police.
His character is not an issue, his gun is.
His life then gets scrutinized.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: watchitburn
Like if a person has committed armed robbery and attempted murder before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they are a scumbag and the world is probably just a little better without them spreading they're scumbaggery around.

If you murder a stranger, knowing NOTHING about him, then find out later that he had a criminal past, it doesn't justify the act of murdering a perfect stranger. You can TELL yourself it's justified after the fact, but you still murdered someone, knowing nothing about him.

No one is making that argument.

If a guy is a convicted pedo and served his time, no one is justified double tapping the guy regardless of how sick you may think he is as an individual. However, is a little girl claims said guy sexually assaulted her, the Chomo's background most certainly is now relevant to the situation in evaluating the truthfulness of the girl's claims.

In the cases being discussed, he was not killed because of his record. I certainly have not made that assertion. What I am asserting is that because of his record, the story as to how he got shot is PLAUSIBLE. Because of the background of the victim, it is not unreasonable to believe that he may have threatened police OR not followed police commands to escalate the situation to the point where the police felt threatened and unfortunately ended up shooting him.

We can debate whether the police acted too quickly, but the fact remains that the said background of the victim can point to how the victim's behavior was also complicit in their own demise.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Well, if a police officer runs a plate number to get information on an individual and learns that the person in question is a violent dangerous person.

The officer is then more prepared to make an accurate assessment of a given situation based on the subjects previous actions.

Wouldn't you agree?

There is a reason that in almost all these cases the perp has extensive criminal records. That reason is that their past behavior shows that they are willing to confront police, resist arrest, etc. The act of doing so is what typically raises the stakes and creates the volatile situation where the police feel threatened and unfortunately, results in the perps death.

This is why you rarely if ever see any of these situations involving people with no criminal backgrounds because law abiding people rarely escalate a situation with police in a manner that could result in themselves getting killed.

Our officers of law are doing highly dangerous work, in stressful situations, and often dealing with people that most of us avoid at all costs. They are armed (and I think they should be) and therefore, they are going to make mistakes, even fatal ones.

That said, to justify the accidental (or sometimes not!) killing of anyone due to said individual's behavior.. with the exception of the most deplorable criminals.. is morally reprehensible. Imagine our death penalty extending to all "thugs" and not, for example, the James Holmes's of the world, and before a trial even!

S&F OP, thanks for bringing this issue to light.

Edit: I am NOT referring to those who have pointed their weapons straight at police btw. But so many of these recent cases have not been so.

Yes by all means give everyone the benefit of the doubt.

But, knowing their past tells you what they are capable of. That being said, if someone has a violent past and is currently showing violent tendencies . . . use their past as a guide to keep you safe.