Conquer Club

Just a reminder in case you are confused.

Is there a problem with African Americans being killed by some bad cops? Yes. Absolutely.

Does that mean ACAB? No.

I like the bit where the black police officer accuses Obama of lying about the police being racist, trashes all the stats used by people trying to paint all US police as racist, and then compares BLM rhetoric to that of the KKK.

So I guess what we in OT are all saying in this and other threads is, it is unfair for people to keep taking stories from China about 'politician x does this', 'local government y does this' or 'police unit z does this' and using them to paint the entire Chinese Government with one brush?

I like how all the people who say "you can't judge the police force by a few bad cops" want to judge the entire protest movement by a few criminals within it.

I like a good sandwich!

Dukasaur wrote:I like how all the people who say "you can't judge the police force by a few bad cops" want to judge the entire protest movement by a few criminals within it.

Like how the media here were quick to leap on the 'protect the statues' demonstrations as just being an excuse for neo Nazis to kick up trouble, while largely ignoring incidents of journalists and police being attacked at BLM protests. Either the narrative suits the agenda or it doesn't.

Dukasaur wrote:I like how all the people who say "you can't judge the police force by a few bad cops" want to judge the entire protest movement by a few criminals within it.

You like this? Assume not....

Comparing a police force, a body of trained officers entrusted by a government with maintenance of public peace and order, enforcement of laws, and prevention and detection of crime, with a protest movement is inherently impossible. A protest movement by definition is not organized, perhaps unruly, organic and unsanctioned.

Pick another criticism DoD.

Neither of those people would have died had they not been drug addicted repeat felons committing additional crimes. There is that....doesn't matter your color - you f*ck violently with the man, your life's in danger.

I proudly continue to support our police forces who risk their lives every day for our well being. Human nature means there's always bad apples. Here's a story from a guy I know that sums up my feelings very well:

Ok. So I saw the video of the police shooting in Atlanta. I'm going to be straight up. I'm a miltary veteran. And have been on both sides of the law. I have been arrested 5 times, no violent crimes. I am a 2 time convicted felon and everytime I got in trouble it was my own doings. Nobody made me break the law. Nobody held a gun to my head. Nobody paid me to break the law. So here is the situation. When a police officer interacts with a convicted felon, I dont care what it's for, it changes the game for the police officer. I dont care if it's a routine traffic stop things are a little different than your average law abiding citizen. And it should be for the officers safety. The reason is they dont know how your going to react. They know you have been to jail and they know you dont want to go back. Remember, when your dealing with a convicted felon, your not exactly dealing with grandma doing 5 MPH over the speed limit. It's a different situation, and it could very easily become dangerous, as it did in Atlanta. I got feisty with the cops one time. Right after I got face planted, I realized that probably wasnt the smartest way to go about the situation. I didn't cry about it, I didnt tear anything up, I didnt scream defund the police, I fully deserved what I got. So back to the shooting in Atlanta. In my personal opinion, it was well justified. I dont care if your black, white, Asian, Mexican, or whatever if you take a weapon from a police officer, I dont care if its lethal or nonlethal, you have just made a fatal error in judgement. Ok, so they say it wasnt a justified shooting because the guy took a nonlethal weapon. It doesn't matter. Not only have you taken the nonlethal option away from the police, but your trying to shoot them with it, and by the way a taser does incapacitate long enough for him to grab the officers gun. So now the only option the officer has is deadly force. So here is why I say that. The kid is running, black males are much faster than white males. Plus a police officer is carrying alot more weight, and hes already shooting it at the police. If they decide to pursue him and he gets away, it probably wont be long before he has a gun in his hand. If he is desperate enough to take a taser, shoot it at the police and try and run, he is desperate enough to acquire a gun and shoot at the police with that. So now everything I just mentioned, the decision has to be made within a split second. Glad I'm not having to make those decisions, but yes that shooting was justified. Not to mention he overpowered two police officers. I'm sorry, and really hate that it cost the kid his life, but he should have been a little smarter about the situation. Too many split second decisions were made and they turned out to be the wrong ones and forced the police to make a split second decision, which we will never know if it was the wrong or right decision. I'm going with the right decision, just from watching the video.

KoolBak wrote:Ok. So I saw the video of the police shooting in Atlanta. I'm going to be straight up. I'm a miltary veteran. And have been on both sides of the law. I have been arrested 5 times, no violent crimes. I am a 2 time convicted felon and everytime I got in trouble it was my own doings. Nobody made me break the law. Nobody held a gun to my head. Nobody paid me to break the law. So here is the situation. When a police officer interacts with a convicted felon, I dont care what it's for, it changes the game for the police officer. I dont care if it's a routine traffic stop things are a little different than your average law abiding citizen. And it should be for the officers safety. The reason is they dont know how your going to react. They know you have been to jail and they know you dont want to go back. Remember, when your dealing with a convicted felon, your not exactly dealing with grandma doing 5 MPH over the speed limit. It's a different situation, and it could very easily become dangerous, as it did in Atlanta. I got feisty with the cops one time. Right after I got face planted, I realized that probably wasnt the smartest way to go about the situation. I didn't cry about it, I didnt tear anything up, I didnt scream defund the police, I fully deserved what I got. So back to the shooting in Atlanta. In my personal opinion, it was well justified. I dont care if your black, white, Asian, Mexican, or whatever if you take a weapon from a police officer, I dont care if its lethal or nonlethal, you have just made a fatal error in judgement. Ok, so they say it wasnt a justified shooting because the guy took a nonlethal weapon. It doesn't matter. Not only have you taken the nonlethal option away from the police, but your trying to shoot them with it, and by the way a taser does incapacitate long enough for him to grab the officers gun. So now the only option the officer has is deadly force. So here is why I say that. The kid is running, black males are much faster than white males. Plus a police officer is carrying alot more weight, and hes already shooting it at the police. If they decide to pursue him and he gets away, it probably wont be long before he has a gun in his hand. If he is desperate enough to take a taser, shoot it at the police and try and run, he is desperate enough to acquire a gun and shoot at the police with that. So now everything I just mentioned, the decision has to be made within a split second. Glad I'm not having to make those decisions, but yes that shooting was justified. Not to mention he overpowered two police officers. I'm sorry, and really hate that it cost the kid his life, but he should have been a little smarter about the situation. Too many split second decisions were made and they turned out to be the wrong ones and forced the police to make a split second decision, which we will never know if it was the wrong or right decision. I'm going with the right decision, just from watching the video.

... bottom line

It’s very easy for people sitting at home safe-and-sound to judge the police... but it’s a very different situation when you are there in the present and making split-second decisions. I don’t care how much training you provide for a police officer, you can’t train for every situation and in-the-moment they don’t have perfect information. It’s the definition of Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

Sometimes they will make the ‘right’ decision, sometimes they will make the wrong one.. but the way you apply judgement must consider these factors.

We definitely need to change oversight... but you can’t have a board of all civilians with no law enforcement experience (and some who are predisposed to hating police). People on an oversight board have to have some experience with police and/or maybe do “ride alongs” on a regular basis so they can FEEL what it’s like.

IMHO...
I agree the Atlanta thing is more nuanced...the guy was resisting.
George Floyd was under control and there was plenty of time. to cuff the guy and no need to keep the pressure on his neck.
There’s too much history of police ‘covering up’ for their own, and innate biases that people aren’t even aware of... so there needs to be reform.

...

Well said.

tl;dr KoolBak thinks 'black people run faster' so it was therefore fair enough for police to fatally shoot a feeling DUI suspect in the back.

mrswdk wrote:tl;dr KoolBak thinks 'black people run faster' so it was therefore fair enough for police to fatally shoot a feeling DUI suspect in the back.

OK... so he did write “black males are faster than white males”.
... and though that isn’t a great comment, I’m gonna suggest we give him a pass.

I will also say that taking that one line from his post and boiling away the rest is disingenuous.
I’s typical mrswdk playbook... truly manipulative and mean-spirited and outright false to suggest that was THE POINT of his post.

Here are the facts...
*A man was drunk driving... and was SO drunk he fell asleep going through a drive-thru.
*The police attempted to arrest this person and the individual MADE THE DECISION to resist arrest.
*The individual grabbed a weapon from an officer and attempted to use said weapon.
*The individual attempted to flee the scene with weapon in his possession.

Yeah... after the fact we can say he didn’t need to be shot. They could’ve found him... they had his vehicle right?

He was fine for 20 minutes talking to police and acting rationally... why resist arrest?
Why steal the taser and point it at police?

You can honestly argue that deadly force wasn’t warranted... that’s a legit case.
To boil away all of Koolbak’s post to one throw-away sentence and trash the whole point because of that.
That’s not legit.

(I will say.... though I don’t think of Koolback as racist or biased, the comment on it’s face is demonstrative of the innate bias we all have even if we don’t know it.)

I mean KB's post has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. In most of the rest of it he seems to be trying to argue that the one time he resisted arrest he was 'face planted', and that experience qualifies him to make sweeping statements like 'other people resisting arrest deserve it if they get fatally shot' and 'unlike the protesters I'm not crying about it*'. Most of that just seemed like too much of a Freudian nightmare to be worth going near.


*gentle reminder that the protesters are not complaining about George Floyd or Rayshard Brooks being 'face planted', they are complaining about George being strangled to death and Rayshard being fatally shot in the back

My POINT was the overall jist of his statement. I personally have no opinion on the inherent speed of any particular people, religion or sexual preference.

Dumbass SO typical. SMH, repeatedly.

jimboston wrote:

KoolBak wrote:Ok. So I saw the video of the police shooting in Atlanta. I'm going to be straight up. I'm a miltary veteran. And have been on both sides of the law. I have been arrested 5 times, no violent crimes. I am a 2 time convicted felon and everytime I got in trouble it was my own doings. Nobody made me break the law. Nobody held a gun to my head. Nobody paid me to break the law. So here is the situation. When a police officer interacts with a convicted felon, I dont care what it's for, it changes the game for the police officer. I dont care if it's a routine traffic stop things are a little different than your average law abiding citizen. And it should be for the officers safety. The reason is they dont know how your going to react. They know you have been to jail and they know you dont want to go back. Remember, when your dealing with a convicted felon, your not exactly dealing with grandma doing 5 MPH over the speed limit. It's a different situation, and it could very easily become dangerous, as it did in Atlanta. I got feisty with the cops one time. Right after I got face planted, I realized that probably wasnt the smartest way to go about the situation. I didn't cry about it, I didnt tear anything up, I didnt scream defund the police, I fully deserved what I got. So back to the shooting in Atlanta. In my personal opinion, it was well justified. I dont care if your black, white, Asian, Mexican, or whatever if you take a weapon from a police officer, I dont care if its lethal or nonlethal, you have just made a fatal error in judgement. Ok, so they say it wasnt a justified shooting because the guy took a nonlethal weapon. It doesn't matter. Not only have you taken the nonlethal option away from the police, but your trying to shoot them with it, and by the way a taser does incapacitate long enough for him to grab the officers gun. So now the only option the officer has is deadly force. So here is why I say that. The kid is running, black males are much faster than white males. Plus a police officer is carrying alot more weight, and hes already shooting it at the police. If they decide to pursue him and he gets away, it probably wont be long before he has a gun in his hand. If he is desperate enough to take a taser, shoot it at the police and try and run, he is desperate enough to acquire a gun and shoot at the police with that. So now everything I just mentioned, the decision has to be made within a split second. Glad I'm not having to make those decisions, but yes that shooting was justified. Not to mention he overpowered two police officers. I'm sorry, and really hate that it cost the kid his life, but he should have been a little smarter about the situation. Too many split second decisions were made and they turned out to be the wrong ones and forced the police to make a split second decision, which we will never know if it was the wrong or right decision. I'm going with the right decision, just from watching the video.

... bottom line

It’s very easy for people sitting at home safe-and-sound to judge the police... but it’s a very different situation when you are there in the present and making split-second decisions. I don’t care how much training you provide for a police officer, you can’t train for every situation and in-the-moment they don’t have perfect information. It’s the definition of Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

Sometimes they will make the ‘right’ decision, sometimes they will make the wrong one.. but the way you apply judgement must consider these factors.

We definitely need to change oversight... but you can’t have a board of all civilians with no law enforcement experience (and some who are predisposed to hating police). People on an oversight board have to have some experience with police and/or maybe do “ride alongs” on a regular basis so they can FEEL what it’s like.

IMHO...
I agree the Atlanta thing is more nuanced...the guy was resisting.
George Floyd was under control and there was plenty of time. to cuff the guy and no need to keep the pressure on his neck.
There’s too much history of police ‘covering up’ for their own, and innate biases that people aren’t even aware of... so there needs to be reform.

...

Resisting arrest isn't a capital offense, dude. A man running away with a taser is not a threat to anybody's immediate safety - the only reason to use deadly force. Also, we shouldn't need to have ride alongs, we should have a new system of policing that leads from the community instead of basically being occupation tactics. This. Isn't. Working.

KoolBak wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:I like how all the people who say "you can't judge the police force by a few bad cops" want to judge the entire protest movement by a few criminals within it.

You like this? Assume not....

Comparing a police force, a body of trained officers entrusted by a government with maintenance of public peace and order, enforcement of laws, and prevention and detection of crime, with a protest movement is inherently impossible. A protest movement by definition is not organized, perhaps unruly, organic and unsanctioned.

Absolutely right, which makes it especially ridiculous that people who trot out all kinds of "benefit of the doubt" arguments for the police aren't willing to give any "benefit of the doubt" to the protestors.

I've been a protestor. Sometimes your fellow protestors are people you would prefer not to associate with. Can't be helped. There's no approved guest list. Organizers almost always plan peaceful demonstrations, but sometimes violent thugs decide to join and reframe the event. Sometimes the violent thugs aren't even on your side; they're people from an opposed viewpoint who see an opportunity to make you look bad. Or they're just plain thugs, with no real motive beyond having some fun smashing some glass. There is no approved guest list; nothing you can do except the best you can to stay true to your ideals.

The police don't have that problem. They have full control of who they choose to hire, they have full control of how they train them, they have full control of the attitude they indoctrinate them with. If the police can't be held to the highest standards, then who can be?

KoolBak wrote:Neither of those people would have died had they not been drug addicted repeat felons committing additional crimes. There is that....doesn't matter your color - you f*ck violently with the man, your life's in danger.

I proudly continue to support our police forces who risk their lives every day for our well being. Human nature means there's always bad apples. Here's a story from a guy I know that sums up my feelings very well:

Ok. So I saw the video of the police shooting in Atlanta. {etc}

I'm not particularly outraged by the shooting in Atlanta. I think the cops used excessive force, but I understand that the guy made some stupid decisions which didn't help him any. As your long quote said, a lot of split-second decisions on both sides, and they ended up with a dead guy.

Overall, though, there's a pattern, and it's not good. Here's the stats from 2016. 1093 people were shot by police. 506 of them had guns. That means that 587 did not have guns. 170, or about 15%, were completely and utterly unarmed. That leaves about 400 who were variously "armed" but with things like knives. Some were "armed" with really non-lethal things like cans of oil, but let's take the knives.

Yes, obviously I know that you can kill someone with a knife. But if that someone has four buddies with him, all armed with tonfas and tazers and other non-lethal weapons, all trained in personal combat, you should not realistically be a threat to them. Seriously, if you come at me with a six-inch knife and I have an eighteen-inch tonfa, I should be able to take the knife away from you, or my training wasn't worth shit.

I actually watched this, back in my cab driver days. A guy had been trying to steal a car. The cops showed up. They recognized him immediately, as did I. He was a local drunk with a bad reputation for starting fights. A big guy, nasty with his fists but not known to carry weapons. In this case, though, he did have a weapon -- a tire iron or something that he'd been using to break into the car. They told him to get down, he told them to f*ck off and advanced with the tire iron. The cops didn't draw guns, they just drew their tonfas. One cop went into a defensive stance and stared the guy down. A second cop flicked his tonfa across the guy's hand, making him drop the tire iron. The third cop silently snuck up behind, tapped the guy on the back of his knees and down he went. That's all, one quick tap on the wrist and one quick tap the the back of the knees and the guy was down.

I can imagine this going down very differently. See it on YouTube regularly. Instead of drawing tonfas, the cops draw guns, scream at the guy to drop the tire iron. He's drunk, his judgement isn't the best, instead of dropping it he advances. Pop, pop, pop, and he's dead.

I'm sorry, but even violent altercations should not escalate to lethal, 99% of the time. The cops have time on their side (they choose whether to rush it or wait for backup) they have training on their side (even the most violent criminals rarely have any serious martial arts training) and they have a wide selection of non-lethal weapons. If they can't resolve a situation without killing someone, they've made the wrong choices. And yes, the guy who got killed probably made some really bad choices to get him there. But he's scared and alone and out of options. They hold all the cards and decide which cards to play.

spurgistan wrote:Resisting arrest isn't a capital offense, dude. A man running away with a taser is not...
... a threat to anybody's immediate safety - the only reason to use deadly force.

Define “immediate”... because depending on how you define that I may agree or disagree.

I’m not saying the death was good or justified... at the same time, why did the guy resist?
I’m not saying the police were right, but...
... if he hadn’t gone drinking and driving he’d be alive today.
(BTW, a drunk driver is an immediate threat to people’s safety.)
... if he hadn’t resisted arrest he’d be alive today.
... if he hadn’t stolen the officer’s taser AND fired it at the officer he’s be alive today.

I think there’s a lot of ‘blame’ to go around. Most of those decisions (on both sides) were made into the moment.
Though the first, the guy choosing to drink and drive, was premeditated.

spurgistan wrote:Also, we shouldn't need to have ride alongs, we should have a new system of policing that leads from the community instead of basically being occupation tactics. This. Isn't. Working.

A lot of people say things like “community policing”... I’ve yet to hear someone describe how it’s different than our current system... or how it would work in the real world of a major American city.

Ok Duk.

Agree to disagree.

Can't kill violent drug using woman beating criminals. Can't seem to keep them locked up.

Let's go with "this shouldn't be happening".

Assholes f*ck with my family, they're dying. Simple.

Next? Done here...so negative....

In a discussion about whether or not the police should use lethal force in various situations:

KoolBak wrote:Assholes f*ck with my family, they're dying.

I refer you back to my point about the Freudian minefield of his posts.

Even though in many cases I agree with dukasaur that police could detain more suspects instead of killing them.

If someone encounters a locked door at a residence. Breaks it to ener. I have no problem with an occupant inside using leathal force to stop them.

You don't like that, don't break into buildings.

Consider the locks purpose is to protect people from being shot.

What's the locked door got to do with anything? Are you saying Breonna Taylor should have shot the police who did a no-knock raid on her house?

You only lock a door to keep people out of a building. Last century, in Canada many of us only locked the door of our home when we went to bed or left the house. My grandparents never locked a door.

Currently in some places you might need something more effective than a locked door to keep people out. A firearm will prevent further mischief from someone who breaks a locked door while you are home.

I was considering the case you bring up.

Her boyfriend did take the first shot. He was not aware it was a heavily armed team of police.

I don't blame either him or the officers. That was just a bad situation. Perhaps there should be a change in procedure.

I understand the concept of no-knock but it's almost like they want to cause a shoot out.

I agree that her boyfriend taking shots was a fair response to having armed men burst into the house unannounced in the night, that the police shouldn't have burst in like that, and that Breonna's shooting was totally unjustified.

inb4 jim 'you weren't there so you don't know' and KB 'I WOULD SLIT THE THROAT OF ANY BURGLAR I FIND NEAR MY WIFE'

If criminals stopped breaking locked doors and harming people, most of the firearms in the United States of America would corrode and cease to function.

And then a tyrannical government would be able to oppress its people.

So maybe, criminals are valuable?

mrswdk wrote:And then a tyrannical government would be able to oppress its people.

Welcome to Canada.

So maybe, criminals are valuable?

Not to me.

mrswdk wrote:In a discussion about whether or not the police should use lethal force in various situations:

KoolBak wrote:Assholes f*ck with my family, they're dying.

I refer you back to my point about the Freudian minefield of his posts.

I’m sorry... If someone fucks with my family and I have opportunity to kill them. they’re dead.

i agree with KB.

I might not kill someone who stole something... but some guy abuses my daughter... he’s dead.