So, let's ALL discuss the other side of this issue . . .

Discussion in 'World Events' started by toughcoins, Jun 14, 2020.

  1. toughcoins

    toughcoins Well-Known Member

    Yesterday, there was another police killing of a black man . . . I'm basing my post on what facts I think I know at this time, as this incident is only a day old at this point, and news reports may not yet be fully vetted.

    In Atlanta GA, Rayshard Brooks, 27 years of age, was detained, given and failed a field sobriety test for operating a motor while under the influence. Brooks then resisted arrest, took a taser from one of the officers, and fled on foot. The second officer, when Brooks turned and pointed the taser at him, fired, mortally wounding Brooks. At this time, it is unclear whether the officer knew it was a taser Brooks held in his hand, or thought it might be a firearm.

    Regardless of the unclear specifics following the attempted arrest, the common denominator between this killing and the George Floyd killing, and so many more is this . . . the detainee failed to submit to the officers, as is required by law. Almost invariably, this is the point at which detainees may reasonably expect the kid gloves to come off.

    Sadly, it is at this point in virtually every such incident where things begin to go awry. Most importantly, and this is the only point I wish to dwell on in this thread, how a detainee responds to an officer's decision to arrest is completely within the control of the detainee, completely . . . and entirely out of the officer's control.

    I'm not advocating for rough treatment of those who decide not to submit, however, all citizens (and non-citizens) should be mindful of the potential for escalation should they choose not to submit voluntarily.

    So, let's all discuss the other side of this issue . . . why are we focusing on the apparent prejudices of a few bad apples, rather than on the pervasive resistance to arrest that seems to precipitate so many of these incidents? Is the liberal attempt to mainstream "resistance" actually creating these untenable circumstances?
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2020
    JohnHamilton and SmalltownMN like this.
  2. SmalltownMN
    Doh

    SmalltownMN Active Member

    One word........choices. Had this young man made at least one choice different, the outcome is much, much different as well.
     
  3. GeneWright

    GeneWright Active Member

    The belief is that resisting arrest shouldn't be a death sentence. Resisting arrest isn't uniquely African American, and yet somehow they die at far higher rates than caucasian people at the hands of police.

    In fact, it's a problem that our police kill too many people in general.
    [​IMG]
     
  4. toughcoins

    toughcoins Well-Known Member

    You're right, but isn't it also the prevailing belief that resisting arrest shouldn't be at all? If not, how in Hell's name did we get here?


    Neither are police killings of civilians uniquely American. There are civilians killed by police in almost every country on the face of the Earth, and there are 21 other nations with a greater percentage of their civilians lost to police killings.

    I abhor police killings as much as the next person, but I'm trying to convince civilians not to push the police outside their comfort zone. How can you argue with that sentiment?


    I have to wonder what the correlation looks like between victims of police brutality and civilian resistance to arrest, both with regard to race, and without.


    Any killing is one too many but, again, this is not a uniquely American problem. More importantly, without police, killings at the hands of civilian bad apples would likely be a far worse problem.

    I'll ask again . . . Is the liberal attempt to mainstream "resistance" actually creating these untenable circumstances?
     
    SmalltownMN likes this.
  5. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Well-Known Member

    We live in an age where two parents are forced to work to make ends meet. I am afraid the result is that we now have young people coming up in many cases without a firm guiding hand. When your morality is formed based on street corner buddies and interweb relationships, we end up with a generation that doesn't recognize that actions result in consequences. That's my take on this whole mess.
     
    JohnHamilton and SmalltownMN like this.
  6. GeneWright

    GeneWright Active Member

    I wish there were better data on circumstances of arrest, but for now this could give a loose idea of the situation from FBI statistics, though they say less than half of police homicide are amounted for in this data:

    [​IMG]

    As for police stopping civilian killings, it may interest you to know that while solving murder cases is their best category in terms of crime clearance, it still seems pitifully low that any given murder has ~38% chance of being unsolved:

    Screenshot_20200615-093146.png
    2 questions for you:

    1. Where did you find that 21 other nations have higher police homicide rates than us? Genuinely interested in that data. I could be wrong, but I would suspect most of those 21 are military dictatorships. Among wealthy democratic peers, we lead the pack by quite a bit in police homicide per capita.

    2. What do you mean by liberal attempt to mainstream resistance, could you elaborate?
     
  7. JohnHamilton
    Pensive

    JohnHamilton Well-Known Member

    The bottom line on all this is that the demonstrators were totally wrong when they burned the restaurant and starting looting again. These people are just looking for an excuse to loot and riot. The facts of the case don’t matter.
    • This guy was driving drunk.
    • He was drunk enough to pass out.
    • This guy resisted arrest.
    • This guy grabbed the officer’s taser.
    • This guy tired to flee.
    • This guy fired the taser at the officer. I saw the yellow flash COME FROM the device he was carrying and pointing.
    • This guy got shot and died. He contributed to his own death.
    Now we have public officials calling for the officer to be indicted for murder.

    Are police officers allowed to defend themselves against violent felons?

    Do Black people now have right commit crimes? Is this “the new entitlement” to make up for years of discrimination? If so, then a lot of the crime is going to be committed against other Blacks because they are most the victims especially in the poor neighborhoods.

    Does the public have any right to expect protection from the police force? Do we now have to accept anarchy to keep Black people and the liberals happy? Is that the new normal?

    HINT: It won’t last long once the liberals get control because no society can survive and put up with that.

    This situation has set back race relations in this country considerably. You can legislate and get the courts to pass down decisions, but you can’t legislate people to give up their perceptions and fears.

    For a lot of White people, the image of a Black male brings about at a minimum a sense of caution, at least, and fear, at worst. Call it racism, but when a group of people give off the image of malice, anger and unreasonable behavior, you tend not to want to be around them.

    The other aspect of this is why anyone would want to select law enforcement for a career in this day and age? It seems like a whole race and a political party are out to get you if your take up the challenges of a very tough job.

    If the Democrats remove the protections that keep law officers from being sued, this society is finished. Low life tort lawyers will have a field day with this and no one will get into to law enforcement at all. The job simply does not pay enough to cover that, and officers will be too afraid to perform their duties.
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2020
  8. GeneWright

    GeneWright Active Member

    It's the escalation of lethal force that's most problematic in this case. There needs to be standardized levels of escalation for situations beyond "I was attacked, better start shooting."

    Can we give them rubber bullets? Apparently those things are pretty incapacitating while being at least "less than lethal." Maybe there's other novel tools they could use for takedowns too.
     
  9. FryDaddyJr

    FryDaddyJr Active Member

    was he obese?
     
  10. toughcoins

    toughcoins Well-Known Member

    Twenty year old Justin Howell was mortally wounded by a rubber bullet on June 4th in Texas. He was hit in the head when an officer fired at another demonstrator who was violently misbehaving. Howell fell to the ground, hit his head again, and died days later in the hospital.

    Most do not know that while rubber bullets are considered "less than lethal", they are notoriously inaccurate. In this case, an innocent was standing too close to the missed target. Rubber bullets routinely miss their targeted center by as much as 37.5 inches at 60 feet of range.

    Rubber bullets would defeat the purpose of law enforcement on two counts:
    1. They would certainly delay the suppression of violent offenders, and could result in more innocents being injured.
    2. They would embolden the violent, knowing that their lives were in far less jeopardy if law enforcement responded to their reported activities.
    Rubber bullets are not the answer . . . VOLUNTARY SUBMISSION TO POLICE IS THE ONLY ANSWER.
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2020
  11. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Well-Known Member

    One thing that has to be taken into account here. The Second Amendment guarantees us all the right to keep and bear arms. When a law enforcement officer in the United States approaches a crime scene he is obligated to assume the perpetrator is armed. Last year there was a case where a fellow aimed a vaping device at an officer and was mortally wounded because of the act. Looking at the business end of a vaping device, they most certainly appear to look like a handgun.

    Simple common sense would tell the average person that a law enforcement officer has got to assume that the person he is dealing with is armed. @toughcoins is right on the money. Submit to the arresting officer. End of story. You get your ticket or your day in court... A pain in the rear, but you leave the confrontation with your life. It ain't hard, folks.
     
  12. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Well-Known Member

    Useful feedback as always.... Sheesh.
     
  13. GeneWright

    GeneWright Active Member

    @toughcoins the problem with the mentality here is that it keeps not mattering if people comply, they're getting killed anyway. A high profile case from near me was Philando Castille, mudered in front of his family doing exactly what he was being asked to do. More recently, Breonna Taylor was murdered in her sleep. Tamir Rice was 12. Are we really going to put the burden on a 12 year old because he didn't comply when a man had a gun trained on him? Should I continue? I could do this for a while.

    The point is that something has to change. Why should it even be an option for police to kill? Resisting the police is an established crime, but it is a subversion of due process to have the penalty be lethal force. The 5th and 14th amendment support that
     
  14. GeneWright

    GeneWright Active Member

    As for accuracy, does it interest you to know that police using pistols miss around 2/3 of the time? See attached study of several police departments

    Maybe it should just be policy not to shoot people...

    Genuinely down that path though. Bulletproof armor of some kind could be developed? I would vastly prefer if they weren't risking they're lives and didn't need to kill the public
     

    Attached Files:

  15. toughcoins

    toughcoins Well-Known Member


    Important are the circumstances in those 3 cases:
    • Philando Castille never raised his hands in the air to indicate that they were empty and that he was not reaching for his gun
    • Breonna Taylor was killed during a shootout that started with her boyfriend firing at officers first
    • Tamir Rice was killed after pointing a toy gun at an officer
    Unfortunate, but extenuating circumstances, every one of them.

    When considering the social benefits derived from the roughly 14 million arrests conducted annually at the hands of law enforcement . . . yes, that's 14 million every single year, the cases we are discussing are insignificant, not in consequence, but in numbers.

    If you weren't so focused on proving the existence of systemic racism, I'm sure you could just as easily locate cases no less egregious involving white victims.

    I'll repeat myself until blue in the face . . . even until you are blue in the face, if that's what it takes . . . VOLUNTARY SUBMISSION TO POLICE IS THE ONLY ANSWER.
     
    Mopar Dude likes this.
  16. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Well-Known Member

    So this deal that has been framed up as an innocent lady killed because the police raided the wrong home... All this time, her boyfriend started the shoot out?
     
  17. GeneWright

    GeneWright Active Member

    Would you not shoot if a bunch of men not identifying as police broke into your house with guns? Remember, this was a no-knock plain-clothes raid done at 1 A.M. He absolutely had the right to defend himself and his girlfriend in their own home.
     
  18. GeneWright

    GeneWright Active Member

    1. He verbalized he was grabbing his license and told the cop he owned a firearm beforehand to not scare him if he saw it. When he went to grab his license he was murdered.

    2. See my response to @Mopar Dude

    3. I don't care if he pointed a toy gun. Are you really going to say lethal force should ever be used on a 12 year old.

    Let me be clear, systemic racism aside, the real problem is our cops kill too many people in general. Check this out:

    [​IMG]

    Clearly there is a better way. We're not special, if other countries can manage to not kill nearly as many civilians, so can we.
     
  19. Mopar Dude

    Mopar Dude Well-Known Member

    To be fair.... I most imagine the kid likely didn't identify himself as a twelve year old.

    I would surmise that folks in other countries have the common sense to submit to an authority before things escalate. We used to teach that as a founding principle to our children. See my response above.
     
  20. toughcoins

    toughcoins Well-Known Member

    Police already face criminals who have obtained body armor more effective than their own.

    So . . . while you want to deny police the right to defend themselves with deadly force, you defend this civilian's right to do so?

    That's outright hypocrisy!
     

Share This Page