Outside police agencies pulling out of Democratic convention

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: FishBait

police murdering people

You have at least one example of this I'm sure? And don't point to some criminal doing something stupid and getting themselves shot. That isn't murder.

Biden has expressly said he has no plans to defund the police

It won't matter anyhow since the hair sniffer won't win. Regardless, he *has* promised to defund policing by taking their money and putting it elsewhere. Definition meet dictionary.

just asking the cops to chill a little on the beatings

That'll happen as soon as the feral rioters stop attacking them, attacking the cities and burning down private property.

Whether you like it or not, police are permitted to use force to enforce the law. Full stop. Its legal, go cry somewhere else about it.

You're free to say you want your political opponents beaten by cops for no reason and for cops to not protect them for political reasons even though it's their job to serve everybody. Just be honest about what you are saying.

Wrong. I don't want to see police have their hands tied behind their back while facing off a mob that's embolded by indecisive spineless democrats. Dems have made clear which side they're on, the feral rioters not the boys in blue. So why should they risk their lives, their careers and their freedom to protect the party that wants to dispense with them?

You can run your mouth here all day long, but that doesn't change what these cops *obviously* believe. Look at the police unions shockingly backing Trump (no unions back Trump). Look at the crime skyrocket while retirements follow the same trajectory.

Call it what you want, but I love watching rioters and antifa scum get their teeth knocked out by ASPs.

They cops are supposed to serve everyone, you realize we all pay taxes to pay them? They don't get to pick and choose who they serve. This is why we are in this mess because they have always chosen the rich white people to serve and beat the crap/murdered everyone else. This is why we have protests and riots, tax payers are sick of it.

Proof?

Sounds like its democrat leaders not serving black americans since they've ran these cities for half a century now.

#WalkAway dump democrats and improve your own life

The shear fact that you don't think Floyd was murdered proves their is no point arguing with people like you and I'm certainly not bothering posting videos of people with their hands up being shot in the back as you'll just say "we'll they didn't something wrong before that so blah blah blah..."

Yea, police have their hands tied behind their back. That's why reporters are missing eyes, and teenagers are in comas.

And your another genius that thinks I'm a Dem....ROTFL.

a reply to: FishBait

Nah, I authored the post on here calling out Chauvin and the others who stood by and watched it happen.

I didn't say it never happens, but it's a hell of a lot less than you make it sound. You're far more likely to be murdered by a private citizen who isn't a law enforcement officer.

When you start tackling the gang violence maybe I'll believe you're sincere. Until then, you're trolling cops.

Yea, police have their hands tied behind their back. That's why reporters are missing eyes, and teenagers are in comas

That's what happens in a riot. They're dangerous. Don't riot and it won't happen. When your Assembly is declared unlawful you must leave. Your choice is to disperse or be dispersed with LESS LETHAL tools. Not nonlethal which doesn't exist

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: FishBait

Nah, I authored the post on here calling out Chauvin and the others who stood by and watched it happen.

I didn't say it never happens, but it's a hell of a lot less than you make it sound. You're far more likely to be murdered by a private citizen who isn't a law enforcement officer.

When you start tackling the gang violence maybe I'll believe you're sincere. Until then, you're trolling cops.

Yea, police have their hands tied behind their back. That's why reporters are missing eyes, and teenagers are in comas

That's what happens in a riot. They're dangerous. Don't riot and it won't happen. When your Assembly is declared unlawful you must leave. Your choice is to disperse or be dispersed with LESS LETHAL tools. Not nonlethal which doesn't exist

Just because police *only* kill around 1200 people a year doesn't make that number acceptable. They are supposed to be highly trained professionals who's primary job is to de-escalate and protect the public. Not shoot people in the back as they run away. If we are going to give a government group a monopoly on violence and say they are allowed to assault and kill people (sometimes justified) as part of their job they should be held to the highest of standards with no margin of error and those who violate our trust should be punished just like a citizen would be. Instead the majority of them get off scott free with retirement pay, or fired (with no charges) and then hired by another precinct etc etc.

a reply to: FishBait

It does make it acceptable. You reference that stat of "kill" but lets see the stat for UNJUSTIFIED murder vs. justifiable homicide.

They are supposed to be highly trained professionals who's primary job is to de-escalate and protect the public.

BS. You don't know what you're talking about. The job is to enforce the law, I don't know where you get your information.

Not shoot people in the back as they run away.

That's part of protecting the public. Fleeing felons are such an egregious threat to public safety that the immediate termination of their flight by any means neccesary is justified under the law.

If we are going to give a government group a monopoly on violence

We're not giving anyone a monopoly on violence. You have the exact same rights to use deadly force as a police officer.

allowed to assault and kill people (sometimes justified)

See point above. It is not unlawful to use deadly force when you are terminating a sufficiently dangerous threat.

Instead the majority of them get off scott free with retirement pay, or fired (with no charges) and then hired by another precinct etc etc.

Take it up with your fellow citizens who comprise grand juries.

then hired by another precinct etc etc.

Doesn't happen. Police work is highly political and its easy to get blackballed. Unsubstantiated claims are one thing, but proven abuse of power will get you canned so fast your head will snap back. There are lines of people waiting to take the job, they can be choosey.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: FishBait

It does make it acceptable. You reference that stat of "kill" but lets see the stat for UNJUSTIFIED murder vs. justifiable homicide.

They are supposed to be highly trained professionals who's primary job is to de-escalate and protect the public.

BS. You don't know what you're talking about. The job is to enforce the law, I don't know where you get your information.

Not shoot people in the back as they run away.

That's part of protecting the public. Fleeing felons are such an egregious threat to public safety that the immediate termination of their flight by any means neccesary is justified under the law.

If we are going to give a government group a monopoly on violence

We're not giving anyone a monopoly on violence. You have the exact same rights to use deadly force as a police officer.

allowed to assault and kill people (sometimes justified)

See point above. It is not unlawful to use deadly force when you are terminating a sufficiently dangerous threat.

Instead the majority of them get off scott free with retirement pay, or fired (with no charges) and then hired by another precinct etc etc.

Take it up with your fellow citizens who comprise grand juries.

then hired by another precinct etc etc.

Doesn't happen. Police work is highly political and its easy to get blackballed. Unsubstantiated claims are one thing, but proven abuse of power will get you canned so fast your head will snap back. There are lines of people waiting to take the job, they can be choosey.

It's cute you think you know what you are talking about but are really just angry and enjoy cops killing people. Shooting someone unarmed fleeing who you haven't even proved committed a crime is endangering the public not protecting it. And they put "protect and serve" on the side of their cars. Not "enforce the law and shoot fleeing suspect just to be safe". But you spin your narrative.

a reply to: FishBait

Example where an unarmed person fleeing was shot and killed needed*

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
The Dems have promised everything under the sun in hopes of getting someone, anyone, to vote for them. They've actually decided defunding police works. Now...they can't find security for their convention.

Do you not see the issue here?

Thats what we used to call"painting yourself into a corner".

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: FishBait

Example where an unarmed person fleeing was shot and killed needed*

Do you even keep up on the news? It happens a lot just google it. What do you think the "hands, up don't shoot" protest chant is about? Multiple people have been shot with their hands up not even attempting to flee. If you run all bets are off.

You'll just fall back on your "a fleeing person is a danger and shooting them is a great idea" excuse or "he was a known criminal so sh## happens". It's always the same story "he was going for my gun" "he had something in his hand". Yea, but he didn't get your gun and the thing in his hand was a phone. You don't get to fill people with bullets because you are scared and bad at your job.

The police are not judge, jury, executioner. They are supposed to apprehend people so they can have a fair trial. You know, like what's in the constitution every here yells about.

a reply to: FishBait

Criminals attack you and try to take your gun, it absolutely is real. I can personally tell you that a fact. So much of officer training safety involves techniques and strategies to maintain control of your weapon. When they go for your weapon, you're automatically in a fight for your life. When they go for your taser, OC, baton, etc you are also in a fight for your life as they will incapacitate you and then take your weapon. When they get the weapon they will 100% use it to kill you.

"he had something in his hand". Yea, but he didn't get your gun and the thing in his hand was a phone

Its called furtive movements.

And since it takes only a split second to pull a gun and discharge it, you simply don't have time to figure that out. The moral of the story is HANDS UP means reach for the sky and keep your hands visible & away from your body. ON THE GROUND means prone out and don't go reaching into your wasteband, pockets, etc. STOP means stop.

Commands given are simple and straightforward to prevent mistakes and make following them easier.

What do you think the "hands, up don't shoot" protest chant is about?

Not sure. Since its used by agitators every time some moron criminal gets themselves shot the meaning of it has been totally lost in translation.

I've seen a single incident of a police officer murdering someone during an OIS, and that was George Floyd.

originally posted by: [post=25337320]JBurns

And since it takes only a split second to pull a gun and discharge it, you simply don't have time to figure that out. .

The fact that you are admitting that means cops shouldn't even have guns because it's apparently impossible for them to use responsibly. Only a highly trained tactical team that can make sound decisions under pressure and is responding to an actual danger should have guns. Cops can stick to writing tickets. Thanks for continuing to prove my point.

a reply to: FishBait
Did you see the terrorists mow down police officers in France? Because the retarded bastards who ran the city didn't think the police should have guns, the cop who was videotaped, pleaded for his life, while the terrorist kicked him, then shot him dead, point blank.

All police officers who work in cities that want to reduce the authority/power of the police, should quit and go where they are wanted.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: FishBait
Did you see the terrorists mow down police officers in France? Because the careless bastards who ran the city didn't think the police should have guns, the cop who was videotaped, pleaded for his life, while the terrorist kicked him, then shot him dead, point blank.

All police officers who work in cities that want to reduce the authority/power of the police, should quit and go where they are wanted.

Oh calm down. That's never going to happen. I just thought it was funny that a guy admits the cops can't use their guns responsibly. The bigger problem is all the apologist like on here. If the cops knew they were actually going to be held accountable and couldn't lie and be protected the problem would be solved. Now that the message is being sent they are crying like babies and calling in sick for work. If we can't shoot people at will we can't work! Very sad.

a reply to: FishBait

As usual you don't know what you're talking about.

A "tactical team" (whatever that means) does not have superhuman reaction time. Regardless of your whining, courts have held furtive movements constitute deadly force when the officer believes their life is in danger or another's life is in danger.

. Cops can stick to writing tickets. 

No thanks. You can say that all you want but it isn't going to happen. Criminals should make smarter choices and obey lawful orders. Compliance isn't an option and the law permits force reasonably necessary to be used to gain conpliance

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: FishBait

As usual you don't know what you're talking about.

A "tactical team" (whatever that means) does not have superhuman reaction time. Regardless of your whining, courts have held furtive movements constitute deadly force when the officer believes their life is in danger or another's life is in danger.

. Cops can stick to writing tickets. 

No thanks. You can say that all you want but it isn't going to happen. Criminals should make smarter choices and obey lawful orders. Compliance isn't an option and the law permits force reasonably necessary to be used to gain conpliance

OMG, your going to make my point for me? Shooting someone is not "force reasonably necessary to be used to gain compliance". I know authoritarians like you think it is but reasonable people do not. Guy has his hands up and gets shot, that was reasonably necessary to gain compliance? Protestor is holding a radio up over his head gets shot between the eyes with a rubber bullet that fractures his skull, that's "reasonable"? Peacefully protestors holding signs, doing nothing threatening get tear gassed for presidential photo op. Reasonable? Keep licking those boots, are they yummy?

a reply to: FishBait

You made that stuff up

No one gets shot with their hands up. Show me one who has been

Rubber bullet guy was rioting, he was ordered to disperse from the unlawful assembly and did not. LTL may legally be used. Sometimes rounds miss. Don't be in a riot I guess.

And yes, the use of tear gas to disperse an unlawful assembly is legal whether you like it or not. So enjoy those CS crystals, the gift that keeps on giving......and going and going and going

Bet those neckbeards got another dose when theyngo to wash their "activisiting" clothes

a reply to: FishBait

How about Chinavirus? I thought assemblies of any type were illegal....?

If they can ban church they can ban protests.

Eat your own ideology

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: FishBait

You made that stuff up

No one gets shot with their hands up. Show me one who has been

Rubber bullet guy was rioting, he was ordered to disperse from the unlawful assembly and did not. LTL may legally be used. Sometimes rounds miss. Don't be in a riot I guess.

And yes, the use of tear gas to disperse an unlawful assembly is legal whether you like it or not. So enjoy those CS crystals, the gift that keeps on giving......and going and going and going

Bet those neckbeards got another dose when theyngo to wash their "activisiting" clothes

You are in such denial. It's fine if you want to be an authoritarian murder junkie but just admit it and stop hiding behind some law and order facade.

www.nbcnews.com...

www.theguardian.com...

I can provide more but you'll just make excuses.

a reply to: FishBait

Give me a break! Why in the hell would he have a hammer in his pocket to begin with? FYI a hammer is perfectly capable of being a deadly weapon.

Once again, HANDS UP means HANDS UP. ANY sudden or aggressive movements will be interpreted as a hostile action and will be responded to accordingly.

From the article it seems he was looting a store. FYI, use of deadly force to defend property is perfectly in line with my beliefs.

Can't believe you don't see how this guy caused his own death. You ACTUALLY blame the police who responded to the crime he was committing and then chastise them for doing their job.

Cops Shoot Unarmed Caregiver With His Hands Up While He Helps Man

Your second case is unfortunate. Clearly it was an accident. I'm sure the shooting went to the grand jury/prosecutor and was handled accordingly. This isn't murder it was an accident.

a reply to: FishBait

I can provide more but you'll just make excuses.

You're totally wrong. I reviewed each one and addressed them objectively.

One was accidental (bad) one was on its face justified.