.

[SepiaAndDust]

No, he's just a member of the Crips. They're a social group.

He wasn't a Crip.

No one said it is a crime to resemble someone else.
It is probable cause to pull over a vehicle when a driver resembles one of two armed bank robbers who just held up a bank in the area.

Probable cause to pull over. Not probable cause to shoot.

Likely those that don't involve you being on the receiving end of the thug the cop shoots to save your life. Other than that, bad cop all the time mentalities are a waste of time.
Until they need to call the cops to save their cop hating selves. Then it's a whole different line of rhetoric.

Don't tell me about my mentality. My father was a cop. My brother was a cop. So were two of my uncles.

Most cops are good. Some are bad. Some are nothing but murdering thugs, themselves.

Tell that to the mom's and dad's that bury their children because those things dispense the death penalty.

Try an actual argument instead of whining about imaginary little dead kids and their teary-eyed (and equally imaginary) parents. Cops don't get to just shoot people who might or might not kill some imaginary little kid. We have rule of law, not rule of... whatever monstrous thing you're advocating.

They don't need to. People who weep for the death of a convicted violent child molester who had children with a stupid woman who gave birth to got their live is sacred priorities screwed up.

Wow. That right there is just a whole bucket of crazy.

 

[ewq1938]

There is no girlfriend at all in the video in post #4. There is no mention of a gun at all in the video in post #4.

Click on the BBC link for the written story as well.

 

[ewq1938]

Except he didn't have a gun on his thigh & he did what the officer told him to. At no point did he reach anywhere near as gun, but he did reach for his ID when the officer told him to show his ID.

That's not supported by the video or it's audio or what the GF said happened. He told the police he had a gun then went into his car for his ID without being told to do that. The cop was right to shoot him because he was afraid the man went for his gun.

 

[Archivist]

Unlike other boards this site doesn't have a drop menu that shows the names of all those who replied in a thread. But I went into the News and Current Events section and saw enough discussions about those I referred to so that you've got all the sources you need.

You made some very specific claims here. I'm sure you can provide links to legitimate sites, not just just what posters were saying in other threads.

 

[bithiah2]

Brilliant article by John Gibbs over at the Federalist.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/11...ail&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-cbe167ab22-83889421

i'm tired of all of the racist so-called Christians in this world.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

i'm tired of all of the racist so-called Christians in this world.

Who are you referring to?

 

[Frisky Wren]

You made some very specific claims here. I'm sure you can provide links to legitimate sites, not just just what posters were saying in other threads.

Oh, but I'm not going by what posters said in other threads. I'm going by the headlines on the News and Current Events board and the original posts that include the articles that detail everything I said.

And being you have a great deal of interest in this, no doubt you've posted in those same threads. That's why my reference to the other sites that have drop down's that show the names of all who replied in any given thread. That way I could have been very specific and pointed out where you replied in those threads that speak about those I referred to.

It's a headline thing. Not what other posters are saying but rather what one poster in each thread linked as to what the media is saying about those I knew about because of what the media brought to my attention.


That's as far as I'll entertain your posts. If you don't know of whom I'm speaking you really don't have anything to say to me.

 

[Archivist]

Oh, but I'm not going by what posters said in other threads. I'm going by the headlines on the News and Current Events board and the original posts that include the articles that detail everything I said.

And being you have a great deal of interest in this, no doubt you've posted in those same threads. That's why my reference to the other sites that have drop down's that show the names of all who replied in any given thread. That way I could have been very specific and pointed out where you replied in those threads that speak about those I referred to.

It's a headline thing. Not what other posters are saying but rather what one poster in each thread linked as to what the media is saying about those I knew about because of what the media brought to my attention.


That's as far as I'll entertain your posts. If you don't know of whom I'm speaking you really don't have anything to say to me.

Forum rules provide that "you should post evidence and supporting statements for your position. This policy, sometimes referred to as "X means Y because of Z", must be followed especially when posting claims that are widely considered to be controversial."
You made various statements in your earlier post, I am asking you to offer evidence to support those claims. I don't want to search CF to find that evidence. You made the claims, it is up to you to provide evidence to support what you said.

 

[expos4ever]

Who are you referring to?

I think, frankly, that poster may be referring to you (and others as well). However, of course, I would never accept an accusation of racism on face value - there needs to be evidence to support such a serious accusation.

Let's remember: It was you who made this statement:

Blacks shoot at cops at at rate of 10 to 1 over whites. You would be careful too, if you were in his shoes.

You have been repeatedly asked to provide a citation for this claim and I do not believe you have complied. Now: If you have actually provided a valid reference / citation for this claim of yours, I withdraw the entire content of this post and apologize to you. And, no, the phrase "FBI Crime Statistics" is not good enough. And it is certainly not appropriate to ask other people to do your homework for you.

Let me tell you what I think is powerful evidence that a person is a racist:

1. They make a negative assertion about members of a race (e.g. that blacks shoot at cops more than whites);
2. They do not have data to back up that claim even though they claim to have such data.

Here is why this is powerful evidence of racism: If such a person actually had the data, the claim would indeed be factual and could, of course, not be legitimately be deemed to be a claim grounded in racism.

However - and this is the key point - if the person does not have the data, and then falsely claimed that they indeed have such data, they must have made up the claim. What other explanation is there?

And to make up a negative claim about a race is about as clear evidence of racism as I can imagine.

 

[expos4ever]

You made the claims, you offer evidence to support what you said.

Let me start by saying I have not been following the particular interaction you have been involved in.

However, I vigorously endorse this principle you have articulated. And I encourage other posters to simply not allow posters to get away with making claims and then refusing to support them.

 

[pakicetus]

Unfortunately, a good percentage of the U.S. population believes that you should be able to resist arrest, spit on law enforcement personnel, run from them, fight with them and break all kinds of other laws with no repercussions whatsoever.

There should be a middle ground between "no repercussions whatsoever" and getting shot.

 

[Mudinyeri]

There should be a middle ground between "no repercussions whatsoever" and getting shot.

There is. Thousands of times every single day.

 

[expos4ever]

There is. Thousands of times every single day.

No doubt, but I believe the main objection here is that there appears to an undercurrent here in this thread of belief that it is somehow "OK" if the "repercussion" occasionally turns out to be death!

It should never be acceptable that one gets death for refusal to follow orders, making a fuss, or generally being obstinate and even a downright pain in the *ss. Only if you are clearly posing an immediate threat to life and limb should the police use their guns.

Yes, obviously, people should do what the police say! But people are imperfect and being stopped by the police is stressful. It is entirely unreasonable to expect people to perfectly follow a protocol of compliance and get shot if they don't! Even if that only happens occasionally.

The following is anecdotal only, but I suggest it shows what might be wrong with police culture in the USA: I saw a clip of an angry man with a big knife being accosted by the police. Fair enough - the police indeed need to deal with this situation as such a man presents a clear and present danger. The cops ordered the guy to drop the knife. He did not and started to move towards them brandishing the knife. Key point: he was at least 10 or 15 yards away! The police shot and killed him. I would have thought the right thing to was to simply back off from the guy and continue to try to talk him out of his angry state.

In short, it certainly appeared that the police did not need to fire their guns. I think, repeat think, there is something wrong with the "culture" of law enforcement in the US.

 

[Mudinyeri]

@expos4ever , isn't it wonderful to be able to watch a football game or YouTube video and armchair quarterback? Isn't it wonderful that we don't even have to have any qualifications to do this armchair quarterbacking?

I didn't see any hint of the "it's OK if someone is killed for being disrespectful to police" in this thread. Somehow, you see that and I don't. Isn't that interesting?

Much the same thing happens in an altercation of any sort. Everyone sees it differently. Ever interviewed eye witnesses? Virtually every eyewitness tells the story with at least one key difference. You might see a man wielding a knife and police who could easily back up and create a continuous, safe perimiter (safe for them and bystanders). I might see a trained MMA fighter who can close a distance of 10 yards in a matter of about one second and who can kill a man with his bare hands, let alone with a knife. (By the way, if we're thinking about the same video, it wasn't shot in the U.S. Moreover, the knife-wielding man had already stabbed one of the law enforcement officers who later died.)

My point ... it's easy to armchair quarterback after the fact and criticize someone who didn't have the luxury to armchair quarterback, someone who was in the game and had to make a split second decision to defend his/her life and, potentially, the lives of others.

Are there bad actors on both sides of this debate. Unequivocally, yes. I have a friend who was shot to death by police. He was a West Point graduate and a decorated veteran. The police made a horrific mistake based on bad information. Does that mean that there's a pattern of police killing West Point grads. Nope. Do those cops have to live with the horrible memories of killing an innocent man. Yup. We live in a fallen world. Bad things happen - particularly when you incite them.

 

[Archivist]

Are there bad actors on both sides of this debate. Unequivocally, yes. I have a friend who was shot to death by police. He was a West Point graduate and a decorated veteran. The police made a horrific mistake based on bad information. Does that mean that there's a pattern of police killing West Point grads. Nope. Do those cops have to live with the horrible memories of killing an innocent man. Yup. We live in a fallen world. Bad things happen - particularly when you incite them.

Should the cops who killed your friend have been prosecuted for manslaughter or murder? Yes. Should they be doing jail time? Yes. They shouldn't be treated any differently than anyone else. Yet too often these cases get assigned to internal affairs and nothing is done to the officers.

 

[Mudinyeri]

Should the cops who killed your friend have been prosecuted for manslaughter or murder? Yes. Should they be doing jail time? Yes. They shouldn't be treated any differently than anyone else. Yet too often these cases get assigned to internal affairs and nothing is done to the officers.

There was an investigation. They were cleared.

 

[Archivist]

There was an investigation. They were cleared.

Who did the investigation? Internal affairs?

 

[Mudinyeri]

Who did the investigation? Internal affairs?

A grand jury.

 

[Archivist]

A grand jury.

With another police force doing the investigation?

 

[Mudinyeri]

With another police force doing the investigation?

Yes, I believe the state police conducted the investigation. He was shot by local law enforcement.

The LEO's that responded were given false information by a store's loss prevention specialist that led them to believe that my friend was in a highly agitated state and waving a weapon around in the store. That false characterization (store video ultimately proved that he was not agitated or waving a weapon around) put the police in a highly defensive posture upon arrival at the scene. It was a mess. A good man lost his life. I later met one of the responding officers at a trade show. His life is now a shambles.