NFL jumping the shark and kissing #BLM's ass

[Derec]

Nonsense.

The only thing that's nonsense here is your demands for absolute certainty before police are allowed to use lethal force.

You don't know he was going for his gun.

It must have been his fairy godmother who pulled the gun to the center console then.

 

[fromderinside]

As for the shoulda woulda couldas like possible this and possible that and inflicting "watch the video at every turn".

Facts of the case matter. Otherwise we get the simplistic "police bad, black perps good" bullshit that permeates both the Left and the professional sportsball leagues.

That's the road to a polarized police state.

No, it is not.

Yes it does. You just proved it when you chose to avoid analyzing the environment in which police and persons-of-color find themselves. Instead you go down a causal chain that is all too apparent the symptoms of what are wrong with down the rabbit hole causality.

Grow up get off your jumping toy and realize that inevitable means wrong. No cuddling is prescribed. I'm just developing common sense breaking of this leads to that inevitability from what currently exists.

You are way too quick to pick sides ascribe blame as you do when assigning labels and blame after presenting really bad rationalizations. Back off. You are wrong throughout. Sportes associatinsarent bad, neither are liberals. They disagree with your view. Rather than finding out why and what is the problem you take sides as if it is settled law and social norms. Cops have moved too far right. They have done so because they are afraid they will be harrmed if the don't show strength that their personal beliefs dicated is why they are not respected.


Since we haven't been able to bring the antagonists to the table we need to change the arrangement of responsibilities and reactions by the parties by adding other elements and taking away the possibility of lethality all around.

 

[Derec]

Yes it does. You just proved it when you chose to avoid analyzing the environment in which police and persons-of-color find themselves. Instead you go down a causal chain that is all too apparent the symptoms of what are wrong with down the rabbi thole causality.

Grow up get off your jumping toy and realize that inevitable means wrong. No cuddling is prescribed. I'm just developing common sense breaking of this leads to that inevitability from what currently exists.

Are you having a stroke or are you letting postmodernism generator write your posts? Because I can't make heads or tails of this. "Inevitable means wrong"?

 

[fromderinside]

You just jumped the shark.

Pay attention, take a breath. Then when the person has completed his argument go for it.

IOW your last post looks like the reaction of some kind of a "ready fire aim" dumbo.

Inevitability, in my experience, is the conclusion of something that should never have happened. Or, as I just posted it is the introduction to an analysis of why such is so.

I have just as much difficulty understanding those who claim freedom when masks are recommended for protection of society against infection of those at risk. I understand self, but I am a member of a society where public health is a public responsibility. I expect everyone to try to conform. However, I understand that many who are in business see the these measures as being adveserse to business. So I expect some to be so selfish as to demand they need not participate in protecting others.

Yet the many of these same persons see no reason why those who are put out of work need support. Depends on which side of the dollar bill exchange one sits.

However those without freedom from need are expected to obey the law. So what do you expect those people expect of us.

 

[laughing dog]

Nonsense.

The only thing that's nonsense here is your demands for absolute certainty before police are allowed to use lethal force.

Your endorsement of brutality and needless killings is antithetical in a civilized society.

It must have been his fairy godmother who pulled the gun to the center console then.

We don't know how his gun got anywhere. And, no gun in his hand means no immediate threat. I realize that to some people, a black man is always an immediate threat, but that thinking is also antithetical in a civilized society.

 

[Derec]

Your endorsement of brutality and needless killings is antithetical in a civilized society.

I am not endorsing brutality. I am endorsing police officer not having to incur unreasonable risks when faced with armed perps.

We don't know how his gun got anywhere.

The hell we don't!

And, no gun in his hand means no immediate threat. I realize that to some people, a black man is always an immediate threat, but that thinking is also antithetical in a civilized society.

Black has nothing to do with it. The man whom JJ endangered is also black btw.

A perp diving into a car, getting his gun, is an immediate threat. JJ should not have done it. He'd still be alive. In jail, but alive.

 

[skepticalbip]

^ ^
The argument appears to be that a cop can't claim to be under threat unless he has already been killed. Only after being killed is it proper for the cop to use lethal force.

 

[laughing dog]

I am not endorsing brutality. I am endorsing police officer not having to incur unreasonable risks when faced with armed perps.

The perp was not armed. So, you are tacitly endorsing brutality.

A perp diving into a car, getting his gun, is an immediate threat. JJ should not have done it. He'd still be alive. In jail, but alive.

I agree resisting arrest is stupid. But we don't know for sure he was getting his gun. We do not know he would still be alive if he had not gone for his gun.

 

[laughing dog]

^ ^
The argument appears to be that a cop can't claim to be under threat unless he has already been killed. Only after being killed is it proper for the cop to use lethal force.

I understand that you are really confused, because no one made that argument. Not even close.

 

[Derec]

The perp was not armed. So, you are tacitly endorsing brutality.

The perp had a gun on the passenger seat and he dove for it. Self-defense is not brutality.

I agree resisting arrest is stupid. But we don't know for sure he was getting his gun.

How did the gun get to the center console then?

We do not know he would still be alive if he had not gone for his gun.

The chances of him getting killed if he had allowed himself to be arrested peacefully would have been infinitesimal.

 

[Derec]

^ ^
The argument appears to be that a cop can't claim to be under threat unless he has already been killed. Only after being killed is it proper for the cop to use lethal force.

I understand that you are really confused, because no one made that argument. Not even close.

If the cop waits until it is 100% certain the perp grabbed the gun, then the perp can loose a shot before the cop would be able to react. Finite reaction times are a reality.
So in effect, you and Don do want the perp to be able to shoot the cop. And from the shirt range involved here, chances of death would be non-negligible, even considering the vest.

 

[laughing dog]

^ ^
The argument appears to be that a cop can't claim to be under threat unless he has already been killed. Only after being killed is it proper for the cop to use lethal force.

I understand that you are really confused, because no one made that argument. Not even close.

If the cop waits until it is 100% certain the perp grabbed the gun, then the perp can loose a shot before the cop would be able to react.

Only if the police officer is blind and incompetent.

So in effect, you and Don do want the perp to be able to shoot the cop.

Utter nonsense.

And from the shirt range involved here, chances of death would be non-negligible, even considering the vest.

How come the police officer's chance of death has to be negligible in your world but not the suspect's?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Of course it's not certain, but that doesn't matter.

It should when it comes to state sanctioned professionals acting on behalf of the state.

Self defense is a situation where you almost never have total certainty.

 

[fromderinside]

Derec, Cops should understand when suspects are acting out of fear. Because of all the evidence cops, too, seem to be action out of fear. It is best to change the situation and let others handle it.

For instance, if the cop had been acting rationally, he would have started with lowest lethality threat. I believe the cop also had something like physical position control, a baton and taser. Seems that proper execution would be isolate suspect from car, then recruit others, then use baton, then taze then, if unsuccessful, try something else. But people don't operate logically in most crises do they. Why? Fear.

Ergo my argument: Cops should bring in others to disengage and secure scenes when up against one operating out of fear. Believe me, if cop has pulled his gun at least one party is operating out of fear. Proper procedure when gun is pulled is to pull back and cool off situation and suspect, then isolate suspect. But that option is lost because fear has taken over in the cop's behavior.

As for all those infinitesimal deaths while in custody you blindly hold they are just illusions?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Of course it's not certain, but that doesn't matter.

It should when it comes to state sanctioned professionals acting on behalf of the state.

Self defense is a situation where you almost never have total certainty.

You don't need total certainty. In this case, the gun was inside the car and presumably the shooting victim was not reaching for it. It doesn't appear the victim was shot in the vehicle, but he had been inside the vehicle at some point. So if he had been getting it, he'd have it. Even given all this, I still maintain, arguing over this isn't the most important part of what happened. The police stood by after reasonably knowing he had no gun for minutes without helping him to survive. That kind of mentality is too present in the police. I just see it too much. They have to treat life and death situations with urgency, even if the victim is an apparent criminal. So they can easily verify his claim he wasn't going for the gun by looking in the car where he said it was. Or simply inspect him. Then apply first aid.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Self defense is a situation where you almost never have total certainty.

You don't need total certainty. In this case, the gun was inside the car and presumably the shooting victim was not reaching for it. It doesn't appear the victim was shot in the vehicle, but he had been inside the vehicle at some point. So if he had been getting it, he'd have it. Even given all this, I still maintain, arguing over this isn't the most important part of what happened. The police stood by after reasonably knowing he had no gun for minutes without helping him to survive. That kind of mentality is too present in the police. I just see it too much. They have to treat life and death situations with urgency, even if the victim is an apparent criminal. So they can easily verify his claim he wasn't going for the gun by looking in the car where he said it was. Or simply inspect him. Then apply first aid.

The cop separated the guy from the gun, he went back to the gun when he realized how bad the situation was. The fact that he didn't get all the way is irrelevant.

If a shot is sufficient to stop it's probably in a place where there's no first aid to be applied. And that's assuming they even have anything useful. If EMS is on the way about the only thing of importance to do is tourniquet a limb--and that implies that the shot hit a limb and they haven't already bled out. CPR is for heart irregularities, it's virtually useless for bleeding. The only thing I can think of that might generally be of use are chest seals--but cops don't have paramedic training.