Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Playergamer]

Hey, I dunno. Works in some parts of the world! *shrug*

But seriously, nice strawman. Not caring about cops shooting criminals does not equal advocating summary execution.

[Frumple]

Sure, is just being perfectly okay with it when the person being killed has broken a law.

[Playergamer]

No, it's being perfectly okay with a cop shooting somebody who they judge to be a danger to others. As these people were.

[Orange Wizard]

No, it's being perfectly okay with a cop shooting somebody who they judge to be a danger to others. As these people were.

The protesters were getting violent but it's hard to say if handgunguy actually was a threat or just randomly holding a gun. And, quite frankly, I don't have a shred of faith in US cops to distinguish a threat from a loaf of bread.

[Frumple]

No, it's being perfectly okay with a cop shooting somebody who they judge to be a danger to others. As these people were.

S'pretty different from what you said before, that. But a'ight. I'm more of the okay with cops shooting somebody someone else* thinks is a danger to others type, myself, but it's more reasonable than just a blanket "criminals".

*An independent third party of some sort, probably. I hear it can do some pretty amazing things for incidents of police violence and that whole shitting on due process thing.

[martinuzz]

That all sounds nice, but how would you propose to implement that in the field in split second decision situations?

[Frumple]

That seems to take care of itself fairly well when some sort of overwatch organization is in place, really.

[nenjin]

Not caring about cops shooting criminals does not equal advocating summary execution.

If your only concern is whether or not they're a criminal then yes, in today's climate, you are essentially advocating summary execution. Resisting arrest isn't grounds for dying. Being a thief isn't grounds for getting shot in the back. Police and their supporters seem to have forgotten that, because all they see is dead cops and give police the license do whatever because of it. Not all criminals are an immediate threat to society, and not every policing encounter with a criminal needs to involve a gun.

[Rolan7]

Resisting arrest isn't a capital crime, but suicide by cop is a reliable way to die.  You can escalate the situation and force them to kill you to safeguard themselves and others.

[quote author=Orange Wizard link=topic=159257.msg7133207#msg7133207 date=1471178621
The protesters were getting violent but it's hard to say if handgunguy actually was a threat or just randomly holding a gun.
[/quote]
...
I think someone fleeing lawful arrest and refusing to drop the gun they're "randomly" holding is a significant threat.

Like, I think cops are justified in shooting retreating people sometimes.  Fugitives are a threat to civilians if they've been violent during the arrest (all those cases of wrestling with cops before fleeing).  But if someone drops their gun, and merely tries to get away, that's someone who should really be wrestled down instead of shot.  They're *probably* just scared.

Not dropping the gun implies he intended to use it soon, if only to threaten people.

[smjjames]

Which is why we REALLY need to invent some sort of truly non-lethal thing that cops can shoot and actually works.

[Rolepgeek]

I think that's called a taser.

Or bean bag bullets, if you really need something with a kick in the gut.

[Frumple]

Nah, those both still seem to do a pretty decent job at killing people. Not truly non-lethal (which is why less than lethal was coined, heh). We need space magic of some sort. Maybe nanomachines, I'unno.

[Playergamer]

I think that's called a taser.

Or bean bag bullets, if you really need something with a kick in the gut.

and actually works.

[Rolepgeek]

Have you ever been tasered?

Or hit by bean bag bullets?

They're the closest thing we got to a non-lethal ranged weapon with enough kick to reliably incapacitate.

[Reelya]

I keep seeing people going on about how Soros controls everything and is the evil NWO, but... what does he do, exactly? I haven't heard about anything bad, so all I can assume is that he's just some rich guy with a foot in politics.

He's funded radical "Kill All Men" feminists and BLM protests, many of which turned into riots. He also has an active warrant on his head from the Russian government for repeatedly violating their laws, has called the concept of national borders an "obstacle", and also claimed that traditional European values involve open borders. I'm sure you can understand how some people find some of these things to be objectionable.

Most of those things are a complete load of lies however.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/19/no-george-soros-didn-t-give-33-million-to-blacklivesmatter.html
For the Soros / Putin thing I can only find references on lunatic fringe websites. Calling bullshit unless you have at least one "non insane" citation.

For what Soros said about borders, it was a specific comment in the context of the Hungarian government sticking up razor wire all around their country, which basically fobbed the refugee problem off on everyone else.

“His plan treats the protection of national borders as the objective and the refugees as an obstacle,” Mr Soros added. “Our plan treats the protection of refugees as the objective and national borders as the obstacle.”

Basically, the problem doesn't get solved by every individual country going full-fascist and refusing to work with each other on this. It's just retarded. That's how you end up with things like they were going in the 1930's: that's where we are headed, and that's what Soros is pointing out.