This is why people hate the police - Page 4
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 83

Thread: This is why people hate the police

  1. #31
    Many years ago I worked for a well known industrial psychologist. Without any promoting or prodding from me, he remarked that he felt the hiring profiles used by most departments were completely inaccurate and allowed too many people that were not suited for the job to be hired. I think of this every time I see one of these horrible incidents.

  2.   
  3. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe Area, New Mexico
    Posts
    3,487
    Quote Originally Posted by JimTh View Post
    A history of what? You gotta history of something as well. Being a jackass! Are you a bad cop or a good cop? Do all the good cops have a smiley face tattooed on their forehead? What is it about you, besides being a jackass, that cops can choke you out for? Hey...how about letting cops drag you down concrete steps face first? Now that would be a great video. Maybe while dragging you down the steps your lip could split open for a quick blood shot! You are the problem if that is all you can say..."...he had a history". Well so the hell do you. LEO's are getting way out of control. It is now, especially in big urban areas, that law enforcement has a big issue with anybody that questions their authority. They are now killing anything that offends them. What in the name of God has LEO put in their water. Many LEO, that term is offensive, are causing themselves to be reviled. Hope you guys like it.
    Love the passion, find out the facts prior to spewing. Corners report has yet to be published, at least as far as I know. Propaganda or fact or manipulated facts. I guess one has to draw the line somewhere. You draw yours, I'll draw mine. ALL I simply stated was cause and effect. The man had recorded history. NOT THAT THIS WAS RIGHT.......but the man had recorded history. (one more time.....really slowly.........cause and effect)
    As for wild, unrestrained LEO's, I do not state there are not any. What I do state is that most respect their positions and the Law. (beat me up as you please. Especially if it makes you fell better)
    "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." --author and philosopher Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

  4. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,348
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by dad45acp View Post
    I'm guessing you don't have much experience in the public sector? And a shotgun in LE is only useful for shooting locks off doors to gain entry. Otherwise it has absolutely no use for an active shooter response especially when countering another high powered rifle. And cops don't shoot at engine blocks. A complete inefficient and ineffective way to use ammo when they are in a firefight. The LA shooting should be analyzed like this: The cops were waaaaay under armed against automatic rifles with A LOT of ammo and training for these high speed ops was delegated to SWAT only and not beat cops. Now beat cops have at least limited SWAT-type training and many carry ARs that would allow better ammo and range for active shootings. Which have markedly escalated in the last 12-15 years. I conclude that I'm not naive to think that an incident as posted in the OP demonstrates negligence in our civilian LE collectively and that it demonstrates a police state or what have you. This is a disturbing one for sure in the OP but if there was a school shooting tomorrow in my town, I want my LE entering with an AR with a butt load of 5.56 to put the suspect down just like any other mass shooting in the recent past. Not unlike why I have an AR to counter threats and to (hopefully) outgun my threat.

    Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone
    How was the LAPD outgunned? The first dude came out solo for about 5 minutes and reloaded twice. That's the time for a whole lotta well directed fire. And yes, cops don't shoot out engine blocks, they shoot unarmed kids over 20 times each when no crime has been committed. They shoot 8 innocent bystanders a total of 11 times and hit the perp only 7 times in 24 shots from less than 20 feet. They shoot an unarmed fleeing man in the back and walk up to put the fatal bullet in his spine. They fire over 200 rounds at a terrorist in an SUV from a few feet away and only hit one of them 4 times and his own brother ended up killing him. They shoot a dog twice after arresting a man for filming them. They shoot compliant, restrained and handcuffed R&B singers (who have committed no crime and were only pumping gas) in the back and then spit on them and walk away laughing. You're right, they don't shoot out engine blocks. They only shoot at unarmed people, yet they rarely hit their target unless they're within arm's reach.

    There was a video posted in a thread a while back of a man with a semi auto AK jumping out of a car and emptying the magazine at two cops just 10 feet from him and those police were "outgunned" by your terms, yet they hit him 6 times to down him and did it with 9mm glocks. The officer that killed him even emptied the magazine into him as a coup de gras and didn't miss once.

    Seems that your argument is an emotional one. Go ahead and fluff those badges. It won't keep you safe from the jackboots.

  5. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by tricolordad View Post
    How was the LAPD outgunned? The first dude came out solo for about 5 minutes and reloaded twice. That's the time for a whole lotta well directed fire. And yes, cops don't shoot out engine blocks, they shoot unarmed kids over 20 times each when no crime has been committed. They shoot 8 innocent bystanders a total of 11 times and hit the perp only 7 times in 24 shots from less than 20 feet. They shoot an unarmed fleeing man in the back and walk up to put the fatal bullet in his spine. They fire over 200 rounds at a terrorist in an SUV from a few feet away and only hit one of them 4 times and his own brother ended up killing him. They shoot a dog twice after arresting a man for filming them. They shoot compliant, restrained and handcuffed R&B singers (who have committed no crime and were only pumping gas) in the back and then spit on them and walk away laughing. You're right, they don't shoot out engine blocks. They only shoot at unarmed people, yet they rarely hit their target unless they're within arm's reach.

    There was a video posted in a thread a while back of a man with a semi auto AK jumping out of a car and emptying the magazine at two cops just 10 feet from him and those police were "outgunned" by your terms, yet they hit him 6 times to down him and did it with 9mm glocks. The officer that killed him even emptied the magazine into him as a coup de gras and didn't miss once.

    Seems that your argument is an emotional one. Go ahead and fluff those badges. It won't keep you safe from the jackboots.
    No emotion. Just facts from my training in regards to active shooters. You can look any of the history on these shootings and why LE has adapted the way they have. You seem to have lost your lucidity in this post and a couple others today by throwing out some names as if I'm supposed to care. Badge fluffer? I don't recall defending anyone with a badge...you're such a meany. Why is it when you get butthurt you go on the offensive? Is your internet status worth defending? Damn...I suddenly feel bad for you, son.

    Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone

  6. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    TN, the patron state of shootin stuff
    Posts
    1,399
    Quote Originally Posted by KSDeputy View Post
    Things like this infuriate me !! Not all peace officers are like this, I know I am not. This kind of crap gives us all a bad name. Believe me, these types of officers are in the minority. I worked for 30 years using the golden rule, it served me well. The only fights I had were during my first 16 months, working in the county jail. The inmate involved was a mental cases who could not be communicated with, and he attacked us. After that first 16 months I never had a fight again. I never shot anyone. A peace officer should be, above all, a great communicator. I would rather talk for a week than fight for a minute. I used the golden rule, and great communication skills, to work during my career. Do not judge an entire profession, by the actions of a few. Actions I condemn in the strongest possible way.
    Deputy,
    Thank you for being what a peace officer should be!
    Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress;
    but I repeat myself.
    Mark Twain

  7. #36
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Houston, Texas, United States
    Posts
    519
    I still want to believe the Police are there to "Protect & Serve". I still want to believe that they are more Sgt Friday (Dragnet) or Malloy & Reed (Adam12). And I think deep down many are. Its just in the last 6 years (Let's see who became the POTUS then?) that they have become more of a para military. Free Speech is dead when they show up. Case in point. An Impeach Obama sign rally on a highway overpass. The Popo was more of a distraction to traffic then the protesters, but the Anti Obama got arrested. Hope there is a BIG lawsuit.

  8. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhino View Post
    That's why I said it 'appeared' that way. I wasn't offering it as a conclusion.
    The "appeared that way" part was only in relation to the choke. The conclusion(s) I commented on, you doubled-down on here again:

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhino View Post
    He was obviously unconscious though, and he wasn't dragged down the staircase with his head simply bouncing down the steps as was originally claimed, or as was it was originally made to sound.
    "Obviously unconscious" is a conclusion. "Wasn't dragged...with his head...bouncing down the steps" is a conclusion, neither of which could be determined as valid observations from the 1/3rd of the trip down the stairs that the video showed, or considering that what happened (if anything) once they were all down the stairs is legitimate to opine on either. For all we know, the *apparently* troubled and/or high subject was shaken awake by his head "tapping" that fifth stair, and the next 10 were intentionally hit with more force. For all we know, such speculation is as invalid as the conclusions you drew too, which is to say, going only on the video, we don't know squat. That video is not sufficient to draw conclusions from about how the subject died or what happened for 2/3rds of the remainder of the journey down the stairs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhino View Post
    I'd still like to see what the autopsy revealed.... That's where conclusions should come from.
    Indeed. Exactly my point in my previous post, so why double-down on your conclusion-drawing in this post?

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  9. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Southwest Ohio
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    The "appeared that way" part was only in relation to the choke. The conclusion(s) I commented on, you doubled-down on here again:
    Actually I said 'appeared' twice. The rest was just observations on the video that was linked in the OP. You interpreted those as conclusions
    .
    "Obviously unconscious" is a conclusion. "Wasn't dragged...with his head...bouncing down the steps" is a conclusion,....
    No. Those were observations. But I can understand where you would disagree if you assumed I was extrapolating those observations and assuming that they applied to the entire trip down the stairs. However, I made it clear my observations were applicable to what could be seen in the video alone. How could I do otherwise without being able to see the rest? The only absolute statements I made were that he was unconscious (he was) and that his head didn't hit every step (it didn't). And since all of this came from watching the video, it's plainly obvious that I couldn't be referring to something that I didn't see.
    .
    What exactly is it about me that seems to make you feel compelled to nitpick my posts so horribly that you see things that aren't there?
    Posterity: you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it.--- John Quincy Adams
    Condensed Guide To Ohio Concealed Carry Laws

  10. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhino View Post
    However, I made it clear my observations were applicable to what could be seen in the video alone.
    When and where did you make that clear? If it had been made clear, there would've been no basis at all for my reply to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhino View Post
    How could I do otherwise without being able to see the rest?
    Pretty much my point from the beginning. The answer to "how" is exactly what you've done here, admit that the observations/conclusions you stated were limited in scope, and that you know no more about what killed the guy than anyone else, or how much (if any) he may have been further abused by the JBT's than what's shown on the video.
    .
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhino View Post
    What exactly is it about me that seems to make you feel compelled to nitpick my posts so horribly that you see things that aren't there?
    It's nothing about you specifically, Rhino. I challenge just about all posts that I see that draw what I believe to be invalid conclusions. Nothing you said came close to suggesting that you were limiting your comments to only 1/3rd of the trip down the stairs, and what you did say still sounds to me like invalid conclusions. I certainly didn't reply to words that weren't there. Pfft.

    Thanks for (finally) admitting that your conclusions were/are limited in scope though.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  11. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Southwest Ohio
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    When and where did you make that clear? If it had been made clear, there would've been no basis at all for my reply to you.
    When I said "From watching the video". You apparently think that only applied to the first sentence. I consider it axiomatic that it would apply to everything unless I cited some other source, which I didn't. Now if I were someone who was prone to posting unsubstantiated claims, then maybe I could see a reason to suspect something I post. But I'm not one of those people, and I see no reason whatsoever to assume my comments were ever based on anything other than the video I mentioned. I'm sorry, but I feel no guilt whatsoever for you assuming something that wasn't even remotely suggested by my post. I certainly feel no guilt after having clarifying the point after your first response. Most people are quite willing to accept clarifications, especially since misunderstandings are common on the internet. You sometimes seem more inclined to act like some sort of virtual prosecutor.
    .
    Pretty much my point from the beginning. The answer to "how" is exactly what you've done here, admit that the observations/conclusions you stated were limited in scope, and that you know no more about what killed the guy than anyone else, or how much (if any) he may have been further abused by the JBT's than what's shown on the video.
    I haven't admitted anything. All I did was restate what was already quite obvious in my original post. I'm sorry you didn't catch it the first time.
    .
    It's nothing about you specifically, Rhino. I challenge just about all posts that I see that draw what I believe to be invalid conclusions.
    Fair enough, except that I didn't draw any conclusions for you to deem valid or invalid. You took umbrage with three things; The hits weren't that hard (an opinion at best), his head didn't every step (a fact), and it didn't appear to hit with full force, where you apparently missed the usage of the word "appear", which also ties back to the first passage about how hard the hits were, tying that even more to appearance. None of those are conclusions. You repeating over and over again that they are won't change that. Sorry.
    .
    This is starting to look like one of those endless, circular nitpick sessions that you seem fond of, and I have no intention of getting involved in one of those again. I'm sorry you didn't understand what I posted, but I thought it was quite clear. Let's just leave it at that.
    Posterity: you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it.--- John Quincy Adams
    Condensed Guide To Ohio Concealed Carry Laws

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast