Police Misconduct Catch All Thread

[Derec]

"a shoot"?

A person lost his life in the passenger seat of a car. It takes a cold and malevolent outlook to call that "a shoot" whether it is justified or not.

Disgusting, Loren. Really, deeply disgusting.

It's language commonly used in the police vernacular. How would you succinctly denote a justified shooting?

 

[Angry Floof]

I was thinking in this vein a few minutes ago when reading about the man shot by police and they left is body laying in the street for 12 hours. No covering, no tent, just laying there, as if he were a wild animal and they were all strutting around proud of their kill.

You mean this guy?

Jesus Christ, can you put your fucking hate boner back in your pants for five minutes? You might as well just masturbate in public.

 

[Rhea]

"a shoot"?

A person lost his life in the passenger seat of a car. It takes a cold and malevolent outlook to call that "a shoot" whether it is justified or not.

Disgusting, Loren. Really, deeply disgusting.

It's language commonly used in the police vernacular.

Yes and that is deeply disturbing and morally bankrupt.

How would you succinctly denote a justified shooting?

Perhaps a regretted, unavoidable killing.
Taking a human life does not need a succinct mention.

 

[Derec]

Jesus Christ, can you put your fucking hate boner back in your pants for five minutes? You might as well just masturbate in public.

What was I supposed to say? "Sorry for your loss"?

I really despise it when thugs get celebrated as some sort of heroes just because they were shot by police.

 

[Jokodo]

Jesus Christ, can you put your fucking hate boner back in your pants for five minutes? You might as well just masturbate in public.

What was I supposed to say? "Sorry for your loss"?

I really despise it when thugs get celebrated as some sort of heroes just because they were shot by police.

I don't know about you, but as a taxpayer who thus funds the police, I want them to treat humans - even bad guys, even ones they regrettably had to kill to save another's life - as humans and not to treat them or talk about them as if they were some kind of roadkill. Is it really too much to ask the to at least put on an act of being a decent human being, if only while they're on my clock?

 

[Angry Floof]

Jesus Christ, can you put your fucking hate boner back in your pants for five minutes? You might as well just masturbate in public.

What was I supposed to say? "Sorry for your loss"?

I really despise it when thugs get celebrated as some sort of heroes just because they were shot by police.

THEY'RE NOT CELEBRATED AS HEROES. They're just pointed out to raging bigots as HUMAN BEINGS, human beings who were executed through extrajudicial means by corrupt, stunted morons who are supposed to serve and protect their communities.

 

[marc]

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And another in Chicago.

https://abc7chicago.com/woman-shot-...t-about-shooting-at-news-conference-/7386237/

Try reading between the lines. She's omitting key details that she should know because she knows the details around them. I don't even need to see the police side of it to know it was a justified shoot.

"a justified shoot"

I cannot adequately express how deeply disturbing it is to hear you call a situation where police end the life of a man in the passenger seat of a car as "a shoot"

Is he like an elk that walks under your tree stand?
Is he a wolf that you've bagged from your helicopter?
An elephant that you stayed up all night tracking to kill?

It's horrible that you say that.

What is worse, we have had this conversation before, so not only is it a situation of you saying something truly deplorable, but it is a case of you doing it when you know the people you are speaking with find it cruelly unfeeling and repugnantly dehumanizing. And you still choose that as the word you converse with.

Your ongoing and consistent use of the terms "a good shoot" and "a justified shoot" remain the most morally bankrupt thing I have ever read in this forum.

"a shoot"?

A person lost his life in the passenger seat of a car. It takes a cold and malevolent outlook to call that "a shoot" whether it is justified or not.

Disgusting, Loren. Really, deeply disgusting.

I'm using the terminology of the field.

And note that your "response" does not address the point at all. You're attacking me because you can't attack the facts.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yes and that is deeply disturbing and morally bankrupt.

How would you succinctly denote a justified shooting?

Perhaps a regretted, unavoidable killing.
Taking a human life does not need a succinct mention.

The reality is most fields develop concise terms for things they deal with. Verbose terms such as yours always lose out.

 

[Rhea]

Yes and that is deeply disturbing and morally bankrupt.

How would you succinctly denote a justified shooting?

Perhaps a regretted, unavoidable killing.
Taking a human life does not need a succinct mention.

The reality is most fields develop concise terms for things they deal with. Verbose terms such as yours always lose out.

Those terms are not "Concise." They are GROTESQUE.
And you are not in that field.
And moreover in many fields where they have a term like that it is obviously considered inappropriate for lay people to use the term outside of its field.

No matter what excuse you want to give the police for using it, it NEVER changes how cruel and disturbing it is when YOU use it, on this forum.

 

[ZiprHead]

Messenger: St. Louis couple took their children to a protest. Police want them charged with a crime.

“We were trying to leave,” Sarah says. As they were walking, a St. Charles police officer approached and stopped Micah, who says the officer asked for an ID, name, and other information. The officer detained the family and indicated that they were in violation of “child endangerment” laws. The officer told them calls would be made to the Division of Family Services.

Micah and Sarah were dumbfounded.

“Literally, our kids were happy and safe,” Micah says. “At no time were they not happy and safe.”

The officer let them go after gathering their personal information. As the protest continued, the Hainlines walked back to their vehicle and left. Three days later, a detective from St. Charles called them. He told them they needed to turn themselves in to be booked on three counts each of the Class A felony of child endangerment.

They called the jail support phone number provided by Expect Us, and then went to the police station. Now, they are represented by attorney William Waller with the nonprofit law firm ArchCity Defenders. The allegations, Waller says, are bogus.

“There is no reality in which anything they did is conceivably a Class A felony of child endangerment,” Waller says. “The only people who committed any crimes here are the police.”

 

[Derec]

View attachment 30017

What an idiotic sign.

1. What are cops supposed to do? Let themselves be stabbed or shot or ran over?
2. Police do not shoot people because they are guilty of some crime, but because they pose, or are at least perceived to pose, a danger to the cops or third parties. If you attack a police officer you will likely be shot even if you were not suspected of any other crime. If you are suspected of mass murder and turn yourself in peacefully

Both of those points are things #BLMers do not understand. Especially 2, when they keep harping about Dylan Roof not having been shot, as if that proves anything. There are plenty of black murderers who were taken into custody peacefully too.

 

[Angry Floof]

View attachment 30017

What an idiotic sign.

1. What are cops supposed to do? Let themselves be stabbed or shot or ran over?
2. Police do not shoot people because they are guilty of some crime, but because they pose, or are at least perceived to pose, a danger to the cops or third parties. If you attack a police officer you will likely be shot even if you were not suspected of any other crime. If you are suspected of mass murder and turn yourself in peacefully

Both of those points are things #BLMers do not understand. Especially 2, when they keep harping about Dylan Roof not having been shot, as if that proves anything. There are plenty of black murderers who were taken into custody peacefully too.

Again, what a fantasy you live in. Police brutalize people regardless of what they have done. Sometimes the person poses a threat, but often they don't and cops kill or beat them anyway, and then after the fact come up with past crimes or minor, non-threatening nonsense and pretend they were scared.

Seriously, try to be a better human and learn to hold power and authority accountable.

 

[Derec]

THEY'RE NOT CELEBRATED AS HEROES.

I beg to differ! When huge murals with their likeness are painted, that's celebrating them. When streets or buildings are named in their honor, that's celebrating them.

They're just pointed out to raging bigots as HUMAN BEINGS,

Of course they were human beings. As human beings they were responsible for their actions. It is your side that dehumanizes them by presuming they had no agency in acting the way they acted.

human beings who were executed through extrajudicial means by corrupt, stunted morons who are supposed to serve and protect their communities.

Bullshit. Vast majority of police shootings are justified. They are not "executions". The police officers who defend themselves, their fellow officers and the public are not corrupt.

By the way, about half of the people that get killed by police are white. But you and other leftists do not seem to care about them. Only black people shot by police count in your eyes, even if those people shot at police or tried to stab them or run them over with a 3000 lb. vehicle.

 

[Derec]

Again, what a fantasy you live in. Police brutalize people regardless of what they have done.

You live in a fantasy world. Take Walter Wallace. He attacked police with a knife. Take Kevin Peterson. He shot at police with a .40 caliber Glock.
But I guess police "brutalized" them anyway, right?

Sometimes the person poses a threat, but often they don't and cops kill or beat them anyway, and then after the fact come up with past crimes or minor, non-threatening nonsense and pretend they were scared.

In most cases, the person poses a legitimate threat. In most of the other cases, police were mistaken about the nature of the threat and still acted in a good faith having to react in real time to potential threats.
The cases where police deliberately kill somebody they know wasn't a threat are very few and far between. Those police officer belong in prison for a long time, but to pretend that they are not a rare exception is just plain anti-police propaganda.

Seriously, try to be a better human and learn to hold power and authority accountable.

How about you try to be a better human being and stop glorifying thugs.

 

[Derec]

Have you not been paying attention? Note how the problem went way down when the feds quit stirring the pot.

Feds weren't "stirring the pot". The Antifa riots were going on long before Trump sent in the feds.

And note that some targets of left wing violence were federal. ICE building for example or a federal courthouse.

 

[Derec]

That's the same video that's already been shown. It does not show the car going towards any officer.

Because the officer was outside the frame. What it does show is her car accelerating backwards at a high rate right before the shots were fired.
It also shows that everything she said in her statement was a big fat lie. Why do you keep ignoring that?

The girlfriend speeds away and the cop yells "She ran me over!" when nothing of the sort happens. Is it a trained procedure of cops to lie about fleeing suspects?

He had his hand on the car when she sped away.
She claimed that the officer walked away from the car and that she drove away slowly.
His account was much closer to the truth than hers. Why do you keep ignoring her lies?

 

[ZiprHead]

That's the same video that's already been shown. It does not show the car going towards any officer.

Because the officer was outside the frame. What it does show is her car accelerating backwards at a high rate right before the shots were fired.
It also shows that everything she said in her statement was a big fat lie. Why do you keep ignoring that?

I have not seen her statement nor do I care. You tried to portray the video as proving the car was heading towards the cop to justify the shooting. It shows nothing of the sort.

The girlfriend speeds away and the cop yells "She ran me over!" when nothing of the sort happens. Is it a trained procedure of cops to lie about fleeing suspects?

He had his hand on the car when she sped away.
She claimed that the officer walked away from the car and that she drove away slowly.
His account was much closer to the truth than hers. Why do you keep ignoring her lies?

"She ran me over!" was a lie. You're justifying it.

Why do you keep ignoring the fact that cops lie, especially when they purposely turn their bodycams off?

 

[Angry Floof]

You live in a fantasy world. Take Walter Wallace. He attacked police with a knife. Take Kevin Peterson. He shot at police with a .40 caliber Glock.
But I guess police "brutalized" them anyway, right?


In most cases, the person poses a legitimate threat. In most of the other cases, police were mistaken about the nature of the threat and still acted in a good faith having to react in real time to potential threats.
The cases where police deliberately kill somebody they know wasn't a threat are very few and far between. Those police officer belong in prison for a long time, but to pretend that they are not a rare exception is just plain anti-police propaganda.

Seriously, try to be a better human and learn to hold power and authority accountable.

How about you try to be a better human being and stop glorifying thugs.

Seriously, learn about balance of power, abuse of power, holding power accountable. We have one of the worst police forces in the world in terms of brutality and human rights and yet you'd have us believe the problem lies with the citizens they brutalize.

 

[Trausti]

You live in a fantasy world. Take Walter Wallace. He attacked police with a knife. Take Kevin Peterson. He shot at police with a .40 caliber Glock.
But I guess police "brutalized" them anyway, right?


In most cases, the person poses a legitimate threat. In most of the other cases, police were mistaken about the nature of the threat and still acted in a good faith having to react in real time to potential threats.
The cases where police deliberately kill somebody they know wasn't a threat are very few and far between. Those police officer belong in prison for a long time, but to pretend that they are not a rare exception is just plain anti-police propaganda.

Seriously, try to be a better human and learn to hold power and authority accountable.

How about you try to be a better human being and stop glorifying thugs.

Seriously, learn about balance of power, abuse of power, holding power accountable. We have one of the worst police forces in the world in terms of brutality and human rights and yet you'd have us believe the problem lies with the citizens they brutalize.

It amazes me that anyone person could hold this viewpoint. Just so contrary to reality.