Investigation Launched After Cop Punches Teen Girl At Pride Fest

[ksen]

And in so expecting, validate my expectation that you are letting your (largely inaccurate) perception of police color your perspective here.

We must be twins or something because my expectations have been validated too!

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[laughing dog]

And in so expecting, validate my expectation that you are letting your (largely inaccurate) perception of police color your perspective here.

Given the factual and logical contortions in your arguments defending this police officer, did your irony meter explode during or after that post?

This officer gave as a partial explanation for his assault on the teenager that the onlookers were hitting him. That is a bullshit rationale and it is telling this officer even wrote it down for posterity.

 

[dystopian]

Dystopian, if you can't see how retributivism is religious in nature, driven by belief and emotion rather than rational and deliberate thought, then I truly feel sorry for you.

Even if it were true that retributive justice is religious in nature (it's not); that's still ignoring the fact that nobody here, myself included, is arguing for simple retribution. You can't seem to comprehend that. Even after I *explicitly* told you to go start a new thread about whether or not people should be punished for their crimes if you feel strongly enough about it, but that so long as an action carries legal consequences then those consequences should apply equally to anyone who carries out that action, even if they're a cop..

I suppose I should say that I "feel truly sorry for you" that you can't see how you keep on projecting things onto others that they don't actually believe; but I'm not that passive aggressive about voicing my distaste of other people.

I think I've ignored maybe 3 people on these forums since I started here. It's a shame you had to be the fourth.

The only shame here is that you apparently think that ignoring people who don't cave to your flimsy arguments and keep their own opinions and counsel is a perfectly fine and rational way to deal with opposition to your thoughts. It's also highly ironic that you address the fact that retributive justice (a form of justice I do not support) is driven by emotion rather than rational thought (which it surely is; it just isn't religious by nature); but then don't seem able to realize that ignoring someone because you don't like what they're saying is also driven by emotion rather than rational thought.

 

[Jarhyn]

And in so expecting, validate my expectation that you are letting your (largely inaccurate) perception of police color your perspective here.

Given the factual and logical contortions in your arguments defending this police officer, did your irony meter explode during or after that post?

This officer gave as a partial explanation for his assault on the teenager that the onlookers were hitting him. That is a bullshit rationale and it is telling this officer even wrote it down for posterity.

Police reports are written after things happened and when more details are known. It's a fact that after-the-fact knowledge reshapes our memories of events. By that time it would be clear to just about anyone, after having the chance to replay things, that at least some blows came from the crowd, and not the girl.

The crowd that we have NO video of. No evidence beyond the word of an officer and the admission of the girl, that it didn't happen. I'll trust this version until better evidence comes along than a video which doesn't record what happened before they exited the crowd.

 

[laughing dog]

The crowd that we have NO video of. No evidence beyond the word of an officer and the admission of the girl, that it didn't happen. I'll trust this version until better evidence comes along than a video which doesn't record what happened before they exited the crowd.

And in so doing, you validate my expectation that you are letting your largely inaccurate view of human behavior and the police color your perspective here. No matter what the crowd was doing (or wasn't doing), it does not justify the beating that officer gave the teenager. It may help explain why the officer lost his perspective, but it cannot justify his actions.

 

[Jarhyn]

The crowd that we have NO video of. No evidence beyond the word of an officer and the admission of the girl, that it didn't happen. I'll trust this version until better evidence comes along than a video which doesn't record what happened before they exited the crowd.

And in so doing, you validate my expectation that you are letting your largely inaccurate view of human behavior and the police color your perspective here. No matter what the crowd was doing (or wasn't doing), it does not justify the beating that officer gave the teenager. It may help explain why the officer lost his perspective, but it cannot justify his actions.

You and similar keep shrieking for justification. There isn't any. I have said repeatedly that he reacted wrong, and proposed solutions to prevent it, and opposed the retributive punishment. It's magical religious thinking that drives this demand of blood for the blood god. It serves no purpose. It achieves no goal rather than slaking perverse and pointless lust for revenge. Retrain the cop. Evaluate the cop. Investigate his history. Quit screaming to crucify him.

 

[Togo]

The crowd that we have NO video of. No evidence beyond the word of an officer and the admission of the girl, that it didn't happen. I'll trust this version until better evidence comes along than a video which doesn't record what happened before they exited the crowd.

And in so doing, you validate my expectation that you are letting your largely inaccurate view of human behavior and the police color your perspective here. No matter what the crowd was doing (or wasn't doing), it does not justify the beating that officer gave the teenager. It may help explain why the officer lost his perspective, but it cannot justify his actions.

You and similar keep shrieking for justification. There isn't any. I have said repeatedly that he reacted wrong, and proposed solutions to prevent it, and opposed the retributive punishment. It's magical religious thinking that drives this demand of blood for the blood god. It serves no purpose. It achieves no goal rather than slaking perverse and pointless lust for revenge. Retrain the cop. Evaluate the cop. Investigate his history. Quit screaming to crucify him.

So.. people in general shouldn't be prosecuted for assault?

Or is just people in police uniforms who should not be prosecuted for assault?

All people are suggesting is that the policeman be treated like any other person who beats people up. Why is that wrong?

 

[Jarhyn]

The crowd that we have NO video of. No evidence beyond the word of an officer and the admission of the girl, that it didn't happen. I'll trust this version until better evidence comes along than a video which doesn't record what happened before they exited the crowd.

And in so doing, you validate my expectation that you are letting your largely inaccurate view of human behavior and the police color your perspective here. No matter what the crowd was doing (or wasn't doing), it does not justify the beating that officer gave the teenager. It may help explain why the officer lost his perspective, but it cannot justify his actions.

You and similar keep shrieking for justification. There isn't any. I have said repeatedly that he reacted wrong, and proposed solutions to prevent it, and opposed the retributive punishment. It's magical religious thinking that drives this demand of blood for the blood god. It serves no purpose. It achieves no goal rather than slaking perverse and pointless lust for revenge. Retrain the cop. Evaluate the cop. Investigate his history. Quit screaming to crucify him.

So.. people in general shouldn't be prosecuted for assault?

Or is just people in police uniforms who should not be prosecuted for assault?

All people are suggesting is that the policeman be treated like any other person who beats people up. Why is that wrong?

Because the way we treat people who beat others up is wrong in general. If you read my reply entirely, you might figure out why

 

[laughing dog]

You and similar keep shrieking for justification. There isn't any. I have said repeatedly that he reacted wrong, and proposed solutions to prevent it, and opposed the retributive punishment. It's magical religious thinking that drives this demand of blood for the blood god. It serves no purpose. It achieves no goal rather than slaking perverse and pointless lust for revenge. Retrain the cop. Evaluate the cop. Investigate his history. Quit screaming to crucify him.

Obviously, you have not bothered to read my responses. Early on, I repeatedly wrote that an investigation may find mitigating circumstances. But, if there are none, this police officer not only broke the law but he broke the trust given to him. If he broke the law, he should be treated like anyone else in that situation. So, unless you arguing that no one who assaults someone else should be arrested and tried, your repeated mewlings about lusts for revenge are examples of sociopathic strawmen.

 

[Jarhyn]

You and similar keep shrieking for justification. There isn't any. I have said repeatedly that he reacted wrong, and proposed solutions to prevent it, and opposed the retributive punishment. It's magical religious thinking that drives this demand of blood for the blood god. It serves no purpose. It achieves no goal rather than slaking perverse and pointless lust for revenge. Retrain the cop. Evaluate the cop. Investigate his history. Quit screaming to crucify him.

Obviously, you have not bothered to read my responses. Early on, I repeatedly wrote that an investigation may find mitigating circumstances. But, if there are none, this police officer not only broke the law but he broke the trust given to him. If he broke the law, he should be treated like anyone else in that situation. So, unless you arguing that no one who assaults someone else should be arrested and tried, your repeated mewlings about lusts for revenge are examples of sociopathic strawmen.

No. I don't think assaults should result in arrest and trial and criminal records. The suspicion of an assault should result in an investigation of why it happened, if it is likely to happen again, if that likelihood is higher than the likelihood an average person would assault, and how to bring that likelihood within a standard deviation of normal for the situation, and let them continue their lives.

 

[laughing dog]

You and similar keep shrieking for justification. There isn't any. I have said repeatedly that he reacted wrong, and proposed solutions to prevent it, and opposed the retributive punishment. It's magical religious thinking that drives this demand of blood for the blood god. It serves no purpose. It achieves no goal rather than slaking perverse and pointless lust for revenge. Retrain the cop. Evaluate the cop. Investigate his history. Quit screaming to crucify him.

Obviously, you have not bothered to read my responses. Early on, I repeatedly wrote that an investigation may find mitigating circumstances. But, if there are none, this police officer not only broke the law but he broke the trust given to him. If he broke the law, he should be treated like anyone else in that situation. So, unless you arguing that no one who assaults someone else should be arrested and tried, your repeated mewlings about lusts for revenge are examples of sociopathic strawmen.

No. I don't think assaults should result in arrest and trial and criminal records. The suspicion of an assault should result in an investigation of why it happened, if it is likely to happen again, if that likelihood is higher than the likelihood an average person would assault, and how to bring that likelihood within a standard deviation of normal for the situation, and let them continue their lives.

We do not live in a world where that information (relative likelihoods and standard deviations of likelihoods) is available. We live in a world were most people deem assault to be unacceptable in most circumstances. And unprofessional or criminal response by a police officer resulting in an assault is not acceptable to most people.

 

[Jarhyn]

You and similar keep shrieking for justification. There isn't any. I have said repeatedly that he reacted wrong, and proposed solutions to prevent it, and opposed the retributive punishment. It's magical religious thinking that drives this demand of blood for the blood god. It serves no purpose. It achieves no goal rather than slaking perverse and pointless lust for revenge. Retrain the cop. Evaluate the cop. Investigate his history. Quit screaming to crucify him.

Obviously, you have not bothered to read my responses. Early on, I repeatedly wrote that an investigation may find mitigating circumstances. But, if there are none, this police officer not only broke the law but he broke the trust given to him. If he broke the law, he should be treated like anyone else in that situation. So, unless you arguing that no one who assaults someone else should be arrested and tried, your repeated mewlings about lusts for revenge are examples of sociopathic strawmen.

No. I don't think assaults should result in arrest and trial and criminal records. The suspicion of an assault should result in an investigation of why it happened, if it is likely to happen again, if that likelihood is higher than the likelihood an average person would assault, and how to bring that likelihood within a standard deviation of normal for the situation, and let them continue their lives.

We do not live in a world where that information (relative likelihoods and standard deviations of likelihoods) is available. We live in a world were most people deem assault to be unacceptable in most circumstances. And unprofessional or criminal response by a police officer resulting in an assault is not acceptable to most people.

You're right. Unprofessional behavior isn't acceptable from officers. Your solution (revoke his job, throw him into a system where he'll get hurt or killed in jail by habitually violent persons, and put his face on the news, hype the fact that he was unprofessional at one point in time, and otherwise make him unemployable) is not a good one. We should see first if the smallest amount of effort is sufficient to prevent him from being unprofessional. If that means he is off the street and behind a desk for the rest of his career, then put him there. But don't make it a 'punishment' or do it to 'punish' him. And if he shows he is capable of normalcy in the future, let him be. Nothing more NEEDS to be done.

 

[laughing dog]

You're right. Unprofessional behavior isn't acceptable from officers. Your solution (revoke his job, throw him into a system where he'll get hurt or killed in jail by habitually violent persons, and put his face on the news, hype the fact that he was unprofessional at one point in time, and otherwise make him unemployable) is not a good one.

It is pretty clear you do not read posts with much comprehension. My solution is to see what the investigation yields. If it yields he committed a crime, he should be treated like anyone else. If it is found he violated the protocols of the job but did not commit a crime, then I would expect him to off the street for a good long time. If it is found that he did nothing wrong, then nothing ought to happen to him.

WE should see first if the smallest amount of effort is sufficient to prevent him from being unprofessional. If that means he is off the street and behind a desk for the rest of his career, then put him there. But don't make it a 'punishment' or do it to 'punish' him. And if he shows he is capable of normalcy in the future, let him be. Nothing more NEEDS to be done.

In the world in which we all live - not some fantasy world of yours - people who criminally assault other people are punished. This is not the case to use to change that system.

 

[Jarhyn]

So because other people are being evil retributivist shits, you must make sure everyone continues being that way. Because others suffer, he too must suffer.

 

[ksen]

lol

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[laughing dog]

So because other people are being evil retributivist shits, you must make sure everyone continues being that way. Because others suffer, he too must suffer.

Because I live in this world, not some fantasy utopia, that response makes no sense to me.

The visual evidence is undeniable: the police officer put a beat down on the teenager. Under our current system, I would guess that anyone found guilty of such an assault would be sentenced to something (jail, prison, community service, etc.... In the hypothetical case that this police officer is found guilty of assault, then treating him differently than anyone else in the same position because you wish to revamp the criminal justice system is an invitation to civil unrest.

 

[Underseer]

So because other people are being evil retributivist shits, you must make sure everyone continues being that way. Because others suffer, he too must suffer.

Good point. How can the police be expected to keep the peasants in their place if they don't have the freedom to lay a beatdown whenever they feel like it? What's the point of having freedom at all if our freedoms are being attacked like this?

 

[RavenSky]

I don't think it was much of a decision at all; usually 'decide' implies an availability of perceived alternatives. Letting someone get attacked by an unknown person was not an option, and he wasn't trained well enough to ignore her struggles and just arm-bar her and cuff her. That later thing is not a failing in him but of his training, and the society that let him be so untrained.

the bolded is what is most bullshit about your defense of this violent idiot cop. You want to blame "society" (instead of the cop) for the cop's actions, yet here we have a "society" that is uniformly condemning the cop's behavior - and you are telling us all we are wrong.

So society is to blame for violent cops, but society is not allowed to censure violent cops. WTF!?

The censure does nothing to correct the problem. If you have a car where the steering is misaligned, do you throw away the car or realign the steering? The cop reacted wrong in the heat of the moment, after an initial correct action. He lost control in a confusing melee. This doesn't seem to me to be the sort of behavior that cannot be corrected.

My point is that you are sitting here defending the cop and telling us we are wrong. Sure, our comments on this message board may not have much impact, but the very public outcry regarding this cop's violent behavior DID have an impact. He is on desk duty pending an investigation into his actions. Unless there are some mitigating factors brought to light, continued public pressure may get this violent cop fired. In my opinion, we - "society" - in this case at least ARE doing exactly what is necessary- refusing to accept that this cop "lost control in a confusing melee" and punched a teenager in the stomach multiple times.

P.S. This cop did not have any sort of "initial correct action" either. The "confusing melee" was 100% his own doing. Before he started yanking and punching the girl, the situation was nothing more than noise.

 

[RavenSky]

I don't find his claims extraordinary - they are consistent with covering one's ass. What I find fascinating is that the officer says he was forced to beat the victim in part because he was being hit by onlookers.

And people here are defending his actions. [mind boggled]

 

[Metaphor]

The crowd that we have NO video of. No evidence beyond the word of an officer and the admission of the girl, that it didn't happen. I'll trust this version until better evidence comes along than a video which doesn't record what happened before they exited the crowd.

And in so doing, you validate my expectation that you are letting your largely inaccurate view of human behavior and the police color your perspective here. No matter what the crowd was doing (or wasn't doing), it does not justify the beating that officer gave the teenager. It may help explain why the officer lost his perspective, but it cannot justify his actions.

You and similar keep shrieking for justification. There isn't any. I have said repeatedly that he reacted wrong, and proposed solutions to prevent it, and opposed the retributive punishment. It's magical religious thinking that drives this demand of blood for the blood god. It serves no purpose. It achieves no goal rather than slaking perverse and pointless lust for revenge. Retrain the cop. Evaluate the cop. Investigate his history. Quit screaming to crucify him.

It's interesting your humanitarian 'retraining' perspective doesn't apply to the antigay bigots, aye?

The officer was merely a rabid dog not trained properly, but the antigay bigots, who didn't assault anyone -- lock them up in a padded room!

If I pay a hitman to murder someone, is the hitman liable for carrying out the murder, or only me?