State Senator: "My Home isn't Threatened By ISIS. My Home is Threatened by Police"

originally posted by: StoutBroux

originally posted by: grandmakdw
When someone says something like this publicly.

The police should take them literally.

They should be put on a list and left alone.

Left entirely alone by the police.

Kind of a DNR (do not resuscitate type code attached to them) - Do Not Respond

If a call comes from their cell, their car, their home, their business - they have publicly said they want the police to leave them alone - and they should be left alone DNR

Using these statements severs their ties completely to the local police force,
and the police having a statement like this on public record,
must now leave them alone
because the person fears them too much
and they cause the person too much upset and fear
to go near them anymore.

The police should do all they can to make them feel better,
and leave them entirely alone and in peace without the police.

This should be official policy for all police nationwide
and a DNR directory be set up nationwide to help
people who so fear the police be left alone by the police.

So you're suggesting that in order to have police protection when we might really need it, we must subject ourselves to baseless raids, violence and shootings from the very thugs we might in the future need to call to 'protect' us. Got it! Extreme narrow minded thinking is just the ticket here. Don't deal with the problems, just build a wall and lock the potential victims out. I only hope their taxes are adjusted accordingly so they don't pay for services they won't be receiving.

I suggested no such thing. You are projecting on me something I did not say nor infer.

He said and other officials have said publically that the police are dangerous and they are afraid of them.

I am simply stating that if someone says all police are a danger to them,
and all police are "out to get" them,
and all police are worse than ISIS,
and all police will only beat them up and shoot them regardless of the circumstances,
that the police should then put them on a list to be left alone.

One can not have it both ways,

if you want the police to go away and leave you alone,

then that should be your right.

But don't call people you think are worse than ISIS
if you have a problem, that is completely irrational.

This state senator has probably never had a personal encounter that would cause him this kind of fear, but is instead reacting to the sensationalism and meme of the day to make political points with his constituents.

If he says police are dangerous,
he should be allowed to be left alone,
and not bothered by the police.

To call the police terrible things,
to say they are dangerous
to compare them to ISIS
means you want zero contact with them.
Why would he want to call ISIS if someone is breaking into his house while he was home?
Makes zero sense.
DNR makes more sense.

DNR (do not respond) instead leave them in peace
as they fear you will beat them up or shoot them
if you should show up on the scene, regardless of
the circumstances of the call.

a reply to: grandmakdw

im sorry....did you add in the word "all"? I didn't see anywhere where the senator used the word "all". He used the word "the police". Not "all police"....unless I am mistaken.

There is a difference there. One is an absolute...one is not. But I can tell you this: all it took was one death from a Ford Explorer flipping over for the entire nation to go nuts and laws to start flying/congressional hearings to commence. Meanwhile, int he past year, among countless stories, we have an old man shot while laying in bed and a baby being burned alive by police. Both on no knock raids executed during sleeping hours on the wrong houses.

Our nation has seriously mixed priorities in general.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: grandmakdw

im sorry....did you add in the word "all"? I didn't see anywhere where the senator used the word "all". He used the word "the police". Not "all police"....unless I am mistaken.

You're not mistaken, it just makes for a better argument when the context can be skewed completely by adding a single word.

Peace

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: grandmakdw

im sorry....did you add in the word "all"? I didn't see anywhere where the senator used the word "all". He used the word "the police". Not "all police"....unless I am mistaken.

There is a difference there. One is an absolute...one is not. But I can tell you this: all it took was one death from a Ford Explorer flipping over for the entire nation to go nuts and laws to start flying/congressional hearings to commence. Meanwhile, int he past year, among countless stories, we have an old man shot while laying in bed and a baby being burned alive by police. Both on no knock raids executed during sleeping hours on the wrong houses.

Our nation has seriously mixed priorities in general.

"The police" is an inclusive term, it means ALL police.

He could have said "some police" or "a few police" "or even too many police", but saying "The police" does mean and implies all.

existing thread
www.abovetopsecret.com...

As has been stated, if the police stopped hanging around his neighborhood he'd soon see things a little differently.

once more--the 'police target minorities' is a myth. Thousands of people are arrested and processed every day without incident. Eric Garner and Michael Brown would be alive and well today if they had not resisted and fought the police.

Can you blame police in high-crime high-violence neighborhoods for being cautious considering the anti-police violence out there? Idiots like this guy will only encourage anti-cop behaviour.

shut up and cooperate and no one gets hurt.

He kinda blew his own argument at 4:30 when he said "I ever find myself going out of this world" which can be interpreted to mean he would shoot cops if he knew he was terminally ill. He does give a long list of abuses and reasons for how LE gets away with it. The stuttering apologist I could just slap though, so busy making counter argument he never hears the words of his fellow Senator or considers their merit.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Is there like a sign up sheet for this..where do I sign?..and ya no problem.

You seriously have a good idea..Im surprised.

a reply to: grandmakdw


This is regular authoritaring thinking (if you can call it that).

"If you are not with me"
"You are against me"

The lack of reason and humanity involved in such language (excluding the 'middle' when there is a 'middle') is the argument of a child.

This flawed 'reasoning' is the problem with our inability to have rational discussion.

Police have a defined service to provide the community. (As long as we have socialized policing at least).
They don't choose who to serve by definition (however that doesn't work in practise, the ideal is there)

So ... when you say crap like "If this guy doesn't like the police then the police shouldn't serve this member of the community"

Can you see how you are incouraging divisiveness? Encougaging MORE OF THE BEHAVIOR that this State Respresentive is calling out?

Can you not see how childish this language is? How unproductive, how counterproductive to anything of value to POLICE or the COMMUNITY?

This is something that needs discussion. I agree, I'm more afraid (pracitically not esoterically) of Police Activities and Intrusions then of any distant activity of people in a land far away.

By keeping citizen attention on these distant fears is how we have come to live in a police state.

Do you not see how gulliable it is.

If you have a reasoned difference share it with us - Don't just denigrate an elected official (of any party) and, even worse, call for the harm of that person - for stating his truth?

Ignorance, stupidity, arrongance, and above all, cowardly.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Please see the above post of mine. Jeez.

originally posted by: works4dhs

shut up and cooperate and no one gets hurt.

Exactly the problem.

Where is the line? Or is there one?

Should we just obey no matter what so no one gets hurt? Or if you actually believe there is a point where cooperation becomes servitude, where is that line?

Curious.

a reply to: works4dhs

You shut up and cooperate.

originally posted by: jude11

originally posted by: works4dhs

shut up and cooperate and no one gets hurt.

Exactly the problem.

Where is the line? Or is there one?

Should we just obey no matter what so no one gets hurt? Or if you actually believe there is a point where cooperation becomes servitude, where is that line?

Curious.

when John Law says 'you're under arrest' you go with him instead of fighting him, resisting him, or worst of all trying to take his gun. How many non-police here would tolerate someone reaching for your gun (if you had one)?
The police represent civil authority; their title is often something like 'officer of the law'. if we defy the officer we defy the law, and by extension the (city, county, state) political entity behind the law. That's what happened in NY with Garner. The police didn't choke him (leading to his death, which was tragic) because he was selling cigs, they grappled with him when he fought off their arrest attempts. If they police are wrong it can be settled later, but if John Law says 'come with me' you go with.
hey, clod, I've never been arrested but I've been pulled for traffic violations. I sat quietly, kept my hands in view, and cooperated. guess what, I didn't get shot, beat or harrassed. (I did get fines, but that was my fault.)

I shouldn't be rude..lm just pushing your buttons, in regards to myself..I have never not complied for that matter im not mouthy to them. I have to go to work right now and not into recounting my experience right now but they do not have my trust or faith for multiple reasons via personal experience I do not have time to relate.
Cheers

The police state will and has already won.

Because of comments like the one the Senator made to the white guy "you don't have to deal with it because of your 'privilege'".

Every time there is an incident of police violence or misconduct the cause is co-opted by race baiting hate mongers to fill their pockets and push their agenda.

Kelley Thomas' privilege didn't help him out too much.

originally posted by: grandmakdw
When someone says something like this publicly.

The police should take them literally.

They should be put on a list and left alone.

Left entirely alone by the police.

Kind of a DNR (do not resuscitate type code attached to them) - Do Not Respond

If a call comes from their cell, their car, their home, their business - they have publicly said they want the police to leave them alone - and they should be left alone DNR

Using these statements severs their ties completely to the local police force,
and the police having a statement like this on public record,
must now leave them alone
because the person fears them too much
and they cause the person too much upset and fear
to go near them anymore.

The police should do all they can to make them feel better,
and leave them entirely alone and in peace without the police.

This should be official policy for all police nationwide
and a DNR directory be set up nationwide to help
people who so fear the police be left alone by the police.

Police pick on people that didn't even call them in the first place. Murder, Rape, Theft. Maybe a couple others should be the only thing police take care of. None of this, well, you violated law 46 under section 8 on page 7294. Like what? Justice should NOT be that complicated. Oh, i wasnt wearing a seatbelt, sure fine me up the ass to the point i cant pay the ticket, my license gets suspended, get fired because of no transportation. Do yall not see this EVIL circle? Its like they want you to look at life as a chore instead of something you should enjoy while you still have it. Pathetic.

originally posted by: FyreByrd
a reply to: grandmakdw


This is regular authoritaring thinking (if you can call it that).

"If you are not with me"
"You are against me"

The lack of reason and humanity involved in such language (excluding the 'middle' when there is a 'middle') is the argument of a child.

This flawed 'reasoning' is the problem with our inability to have rational discussion.

Police have a defined service to provide the community. (As long as we have socialized policing at least).
They don't choose who to serve by definition (however that doesn't work in practise, the ideal is there)

So ... when you say crap like "If this guy doesn't like the police then the police shouldn't serve this member of the community"

Can you see how you are incouraging divisiveness? Encougaging MORE OF THE BEHAVIOR that this State Respresentive is calling out?

Can you not see how childish this language is? How unproductive, how counterproductive to anything of value to POLICE or the COMMUNITY?

This is something that needs discussion. I agree, I'm more afraid (pracitically not esoterically) of Police Activities and Intrusions then of any distant activity of people in a land far away.

By keeping citizen attention on these distant fears is how we have come to live in a police state.

Do you not see how gulliable it is.

If you have a reasoned difference share it with us - Don't just denigrate an elected official (of any party) and, even worse, call for the harm of that person - for stating his truth?

Ignorance, stupidity, arrongance, and above all, cowardly.

I did not call for harming the elected official.

You don't think comparing the entire police force to ISIS, seriously, that isn't ignorant, stupid, arrogant and above all cowardly?

He was the one who by default said ALL police were against people of color and ALL police were worse than ISIS. When he did not put a qualification that some, or a few, or even way too many police, no he just the police are worse than ISIS.

And you think my words are bad? I was just saying, if someone thinks calling the police is like calling ISIS to your house then why on earth would you want them to come to your aid or assistance?

originally posted by: StoutBroux

originally posted by: grandmakdw
When someone says something like this publicly.

The police should take them literally.

They should be put on a list and left alone.

Left entirely alone by the police.

Kind of a DNR (do not resuscitate type code attached to them) - Do Not Respond

If a call comes from their cell, their car, their home, their business - they have publicly said they want the police to leave them alone - and they should be left alone DNR

Using these statements severs their ties completely to the local police force,
and the police having a statement like this on public record,
must now leave them alone
because the person fears them too much
and they cause the person too much upset and fear
to go near them anymore.

The police should do all they can to make them feel better,
and leave them entirely alone and in peace without the police.

This should be official policy for all police nationwide
and a DNR directory be set up nationwide to help
people who so fear the police be left alone by the police.

So you're suggesting that in order to have police protection when we might really need it, we must subject ourselves to baseless raids, violence and shootings from the very thugs we might in the future need to call to 'protect' us. Got it! Extreme narrow minded thinking is just the ticket here. Don't deal with the problems, just build a wall and lock the potential victims out. I only hope their taxes are adjusted accordingly so they don't pay for services they won't be receiving.

This "leader" is not calling for any solution, or working with the police to find a solution, he is just name calling and saying how awful and terrible the police are. What constructive suggestions did he make, how did what he say make any progress toward positive change? How can calling the police worse than ISIS be in any way broad minded or looking for a solution?

It is political rhetoric in it's basest form: inciting hatred to get votes, with no positive action, no reaching out to try and find a solution, just inciting hatred.

My "suggestion" points out the logical conclusion to calling for hatred for all police,
the police are people too and why should they go out of their way
to help anyone who stoops so low as to call them worse than ISIS (beheaders/rapists/people who set others on fire)?

If that is what he really thinks of all police
why would he even want to call them at all
even if someone were breaking into his home
with his wife and kids there?
Wouldn't calling someone who might behead/rape or set your family on fire (the police) be worse than the burgler?

What I see are a bunch of immature whiners.

You think the police are terrible, awful, wretched examples of human beings, whose only goal is to harass and harm people of color.

But when you are being threatened or harmed, you want these terrible, awful, wretched examples of human beings to run to your rescue.

Do you not realize how ridiculous that is. To name call them in one breath and demand they protect you in the next breath?

Of course I was being tongue in cheek with my statement on page 1.

It was simply an extension on the other side of the henious things many of the posters were saying about police.

Yet when I pointed out, if you think they are so awful, then keep them away from people who think the police are worse than ISIS and likely to behead/rape/or burn you alive;
then why on earth would you want them to protect you? Doesn't make sense.

Most police I know are decent human beings, with families, who care about their job and are doing their best daily. Too bad 99% of you posting here refuse to say even one decent thing about these people who do put their lives on the line daily for you.

You hate the police, fine, just don't call them when you need them, don't be hypocrites or worse yet bipolar about what you think of police.

a reply to: grandmakdw

You hate the police, fine, just don't call them when you need them, don't be hypocrites or worse yet bipolar about what you think of police.

As long as the majority take no action for the small number who are violent, the Police can all be thrown together and considered as one.

If a fellow Police Officer goes too far, they need to be arrested right there and then. This is not happening. Too many Police looking the other way.

Some Police are violent.
More Police cover for them
The remainder remain silent.

All are still guilty!

P

a reply to: grandmakdw

the post on page 1 was a straw man. plain and simple.

And I don't see a bunch of folks complaining about cops harrassing people of color. Matter of fact..my beef stems from them harassing me.

but to be honest.....a common phrase in this area is "I don't dial 911"....so it wouldn't be surprising to find folks willing to forego any police "protection".