Active Users:445 Time:06/07/2025 03:33:37 PM
Re: Cops picked their fight with Garner, too: Why is that not tyranny? Cannoli Send a noteboard - 18/07/2015 01:59:41 PM


Trayvon Martin was stalked and attacked
Or stalked and attacked someone for noticing him acting suspiciously. There is at least as much evidence for the that as for the version his supporters promulgated.

Michael Brown was unarmed, distant and fleeing, so I must disagree with the Ferguson and DoJ conclusions the cops claim to feel threatened cannot be disproven. If Brown reached into his car and grabbed his gun, sure, he was threatened then: But not when Brown FLED. Sorry, when someone exits their vehicle and PURSUES another, they cannot plausible claim to feel "threatened."
A police officer is negligent in his duty if he allows an assault suspect to flee. And Brown was not shot while fleeing, as his own family's autopsy proved, unless he decided to flee facing the cop.

Murdering someones sleeping child is bad enough, but LITERALLY rubbing their face in their childs corpse and ARRESTING them adds grave insult to grave injury. I mean, gee, officer, since you arrested ME because YOU killed my daughter, will you at least bond me out long enough to bury her? If cops wanted to "calm" a situation their murder made confrontational, that was a poor means, and quite relevant because it is further evidence of their disregard and even contempt for the lives of the innocent public they are required and paid to "serve and protect."
No, it is disregard for aesthetics and emotions, which are not supposed to have anything to do with the law and its application. By the nature of their job and duties, cops cannot say "Oops," and back off in such situations. What possible good could have come of not restraining the father? At best, you'd have someone running around screaming and yelling at a crime scene. At worst, it ends with him and maybe more people dead.

By the nature of the job, a cop can't back off in such a case, anymore than a bullet can crawl back into the gun barrel.



For what it is worth, I share Kasichs (official) view of unions: "Unions that make things" are great, but public employees do not need a union for collective bargaining nor to hold their employer acountable: They already HAVE a ballot box to do those things; if that is not working, the solution is to make it work, not add a SECOND nonfunctional ballot box. Further, police union reactions to police shootings have been rather uniformly and awfully biased: Victims are presumed guilty until proven innocent, even though corpses can make no arguments.

All that said, police unions at least prevent local governments scapegoating individual officers for following official POLICY; "indicting a bunch of idiot stormtroopers for following orders."


There is that. On the other hand, they'd find ways to not kick down doors, if they knew it was a no win situation.
The stormtroopers are still responsible for ALL their own acts, ordered or otherwise, but those who gave the orders are no less so. In that respect, the judge who issued first warrant was only responsible (and only partially) for cops actions at the place for which that warrant was ISSUED—until s/he turned that warrant into a blank check by retroactively adding ANOTHER place to cover the cops murder. Had they robbed a donut shop on the way back to the station, would the judge add THAT to the warrant also?
Why would they rob a donut shop? Those places fawn on and cater to cops. I know cops who refuse to go into Dunkin' Donuts in uniform because they can't get them to take money. I also know cops who have refused to pay for coffee when asked by the clerk at a local convenience store.

Not that towns ACTUAL cops are any better; one woman I knew there (who, ironically, lived in the OTHER cops' jurisdiction) used to complain about one of the local cops stalking her, hanging out sipping copy all night at the store where she worked, then tailgating her in his squad car all the way to her driveway. That would be creepy and threatening even if he did NOT have a badge and gun, but since he did....
Yeah, I'd bet every department has at least one of those.
Returning from overly-personal tangent (no offense meant, ) there is an easy way to maintain law enforcement with niether cops NOR (other) citizens killed en masse: Lethal force is ONLY legal to resist lethal force. Simple easy rule; it works remarkably well for EVERYONE ELSE, so why should cops use a different standard?
I keep coming back to the line in Terry Pratchett's "Jingo" where Sam Vimes, the police chief, in a conference about a sudden military issue that has arisen, in response to condescending remark about "civilians" says something like "A police officer IS a civilian, that's the point." Why do cops need more powers than mall cops? I agree with letting cops carry guns, but only because I agree with anyone carrying guns. Including some retarded people and felons (which, come to think of it, is not all that different from many cops I know). But last week, I was down the shore and noticed all the Class I & II special officers who were doing the bulk of the patrolling on the boardwalk at Seaside. In NJ a Class I can't even carry a gun, and a Class II is very limited in his jurisdiction, not being allowed to do much more than issue citations under title 39 (which is the motor vehicle code - so basically, he can write tickets). If such officers suffice to safeguard the facility which is pretty much the sine qua non of the local economy, and the most crowded and busy place on the Barnegat Peninsula, with the lowest class element of humanity, why do the rest of us need tactical operatives, who are armed like soldiers, without the discipline, training or command structure of soldiers?
It is not irresponsibilty, but selfish indifference to others,
The literal definition of irresponsibility
and that is literally in humanitys DNA, so even God will not remove it without removing that DNA. Conviction, confession, repentance, atonement, grace and salvation; great: Your flesh is still dying, as it should and must. The only TEMPORAL means of mitigating that is collective enlightened self-interest; each person insisting no other person abuses power over another, lest they tomorrow become its victim THEMSELVES. That is why warrants exist, and why the Fourth Amendment exists, and there is no problem with that: Even warrants do not empower anyone to shoot first and ask questions later.
You would think.
Cannoli
"Sometimes unhinged, sometimes unfair, always entertaining"
- The Crownless

“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” GK Chesteron
Deus Vult!
Reply to message
So Eric Garner's family is getting $5.9 million dollars. How awesome is that? - 16/07/2015 03:10:14 PM 894 Views
...? *NM* - 16/07/2015 07:09:33 PM 319 Views
we need to stop giving away millions tax dollars and calling it justice - 17/07/2015 01:14:39 AM 445 Views
IDK, I got the impression hustle was a good thing - 17/07/2015 12:42:07 PM 623 Views
I bitched about going Off-Topic the last time I posted on this board... - 17/07/2015 05:22:29 PM 602 Views
Are you being ironic? - 18/07/2015 01:14:07 PM 615 Views
So what do you think he would have doing for money without the tax? - 17/07/2015 05:39:33 PM 525 Views
Who cares? That's his business. - 18/07/2015 01:16:44 PM 613 Views
You seem to care since you brought it up - 18/07/2015 01:28:46 PM 592 Views
why only some child molesters? - 17/07/2015 05:40:21 PM 590 Views
That is two jobs, not one; also, the government does not lobby itself. - 17/07/2015 03:09:15 AM 512 Views
the silly "unarmed" argument - 17/07/2015 04:57:32 AM 583 Views
All I heard was "no one 'needs' guns." - 17/07/2015 10:59:40 AM 681 Views
See, these are tyranny, because the cops picked the fights. - 17/07/2015 02:09:21 PM 560 Views
Cops picked their fight with Garner, too: Why is that not tyranny? - 18/07/2015 03:33:52 AM 566 Views
Re: Cops picked their fight with Garner, too: Why is that not tyranny? - 18/07/2015 01:59:41 PM 595 Views
The above question remains, unanswered - 09/08/2015 04:20:37 AM 592 Views
Sorry but almost everything you said was wrong - 18/07/2015 02:48:44 PM 603 Views
... was exactly that. - 09/08/2015 04:23:54 AM 529 Views
Sorry but almost everything you said was wrong - 18/07/2015 02:48:45 PM 585 Views

Reply to Message