• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Justice Department tellsFerguson police tostopwearing bracelets

JasperL said:
I can't speak for others, but the short answer is obviously NO!

But if you're family of the dead person, and NASCAR officials, and/or the appropriate police personnel who investigated it, show up ON THE JOB, IN UNIFORM with "I AM TONY STEWART" or "I Heart 14!" buttons on their lapels as they try and determine if charges should be filed, then the family should rationally suspect that the investigation might not be objective.

It's really a very simple point - I can't believe it isn't obvious.

It's different for Tony's crew or team members or members of his fan club or family. They have no authority. But the cops in Ferguson either did or still have roles in this ongoing investigation, and those that aren't involved directly still maintain the power to arrest and detain protesters. They have an obligation to at least pretend to be impartial while they're going about official functions - i.e. in uniform, on duty.
Click to expand...
If they arent involved in conducting the investigation then there should be no problem with them showing support for their fellow officer.
 
Excon said:
It's an irrelevant and stupid point, as the Officers are not, and have nothing to do with investigating Officer Wilson.
It is nothing more than faux outrage from the idiotic protestors.
Click to expand...
Boom.

It would be a salient point...if it were IA wearing the bracelets.
 
Excon said:
It's an irrelevant and stupid point, as the Officers are not, and have nothing to do with investigating Officer Wilson.
Click to expand...

First of all, you have no idea if that's true or not. And whether the individuals never did or currently have no role in the investigation, they're still members of the police and have the authority to arrest and detain individuals.

It is nothing more than faux outrage from the idiotic protestors.
Click to expand...

It's kind of funny that the defenders of the policy can't help but display their massive biases in this case. It's fine when you do it - not when police with the power to arrest and jail others do, while in uniform, ON DUTY.
 
JasperL said:
First of all, you have no idea if that's true or not.
Click to expand...
Your assertion is absurd.
The investigation was turned over to another force.


JasperL said:
And whether the individuals never did or currently have no role in the investigation, they're still members of the police and have the authority to arrest and detain individuals.
Click to expand...
We are going in circles here.
And? Just because they show support for a fellow Officer does not mean they are not impartial to the actions of protestors.
And secondly they should be showing a bias towards law enforcement, not neutrality or lawlessness.



JasperL said:
It's kind of funny that the defenders of the policy can't help but display their massive biases in this case. It's fine when you do it - not when police with the power to arrest and jail others do, while in uniform, ON DUTY.
Click to expand...
Wtf nonsense are you talking about this time?

The real blind bias is coming from the idiotic protestors.
 
VanceMack said:
If they arent involved in conducting the investigation then there should be no problem with them showing support for their fellow officer.
Click to expand...

I think you guys are trying to miss the point, and succeeding. It seems impossible for someone to spend the trivial mental gymnastics necessary to achieve a bit of empathy here and put yourself in the position of the community. Assume, for example, the jack booted Obama DEA thugs shot and killed one of your church members, unarmed. Are you really telling me you'd have no problem if the DEA or FBI or anyone in the Federal government, still patrolling your little town, armed, with the power to arrest you and detain you and your neighbors, were wearing bracelets declaring their support for the person who killed your neighbor?

I don't believe it, and I don't think you actually believe it, not if you had any doubt about the shooting.

The problem here is I think you all have decided Wilson was right, Brown needed killing, so the police are on the right side. But the community the police officers serve don't agree, and they are the people who should matter - not guys on the internet 1,000 miles from the scene.
 
JasperL said:
I think you guys are trying to miss the point, and succeeding. It seems impossible for someone to spend the trivial mental gymnastics necessary to achieve a bit of empathy here and put yourself in the position of the community. Assume, for example, the jack booted Obama DEA thugs shot and killed one of your church members, unarmed. Are you really telling me you'd have no problem if the DEA or FBI or anyone in the Federal government, still patrolling your little town, armed, with the power to arrest you and detain you and your neighbors, were wearing bracelets declaring their support for the person who killed your neighbor?

I don't believe it, and I don't think you actually believe it, not if you had any doubt about the shooting.

The problem here is I think you all have decided Wilson was right, Brown needed killing, so the police are on the right side. But the community the police officers serve don't agree, and they are the people who should matter - not guys on the internet 1,000 miles from the scene.
Click to expand...
I think you can attribute your own comments to yourself. I have consistently said...we dont KNOW what happened and as OTHERS have said, perhaps we should WAIT before we go about building crosses.

The law enforcement personnel in question are colleagues of the man. They know him better than you or I and they stand by him. Heaven forbid there be a few people standing FOR him with so many people already convinced of his guilt.
 
Excon said:
Your assertion is absurd.
The investigation was turned over to another force.
Click to expand...

The Ferguson police took no statements, none were involved in the forensics, none will be asked to testify to anything at all if there is a trial? You have no way of knowing that.

We are going in circles here.
And? Just because they show support for a fellow Officer does not mean they are not impartial to the actions of protestors.
And secondly they should be showing a bias towards law enforcement, not neutrality or lawlessness.
Click to expand...

Bottom line is rational people believe it shows a bias. Whether it does in fact or not indicate actual bias is an unknowable answer. But while in uniform, on duty, they shouldn't take acts that reasonable people will perhaps misinterpret.

And no, they shouldn't be showing a bias for the shooter - goodness - you're saying they SHOULD try to tilt the evidence in favor of their fellow officer?


Wtf nonsense are you talking about this time?

The real blind bias is coming from the idiotic protestors.
Click to expand...

Give me a break - you said the outrage was fake and the protesters idiots. Your views are clear enough.
 
JasperL said:
I think you guys are trying to miss the point, and succeeding. It seems impossible for someone to spend the trivial mental gymnastics necessary to achieve a bit of empathy here and put yourself in the position of the community.
Click to expand...
:doh
The community has no valid point so it would be extremely stupid to purposely put oneself in their position.


JasperL said:
The problem here is I think you all have decided Wilson was right, Brown needed killing, so the police are on the right side.
Click to expand...
No, the problem here is the acceptance of a false narrative and the faux outrage.
 
JasperL said:
The Ferguson police took no statements, none were involved in the forensics, none will be asked to testify to anything at all if there is a trial? You have no way of knowing that.
Click to expand...
What do you not understand about it being turned over to another force?


JasperL said:
Bottom line is rational people believe it shows a bias.
Click to expand...
:naughty
No, the bottom line is irrational folks thinks it shows bias where none exists.


JasperL said:
And no, they shouldn't be showing a bias for the shooter - goodness - you're saying they SHOULD try to tilt the evidence in favor of their fellow officer?
Click to expand...
:doh
You are doing it again.
You should have paid attention to what CanadaJohn told you.
CanadaJohn said:
You have a wonderful way of taking pretty clear language presented to you and then twisting it into a narrative you want to disparage. That's fine, but it's a dishonest way to conduct a discussion if that's what you wanted rather than a vehicle to rant.
Click to expand...
As such behavior is irrational.


JasperL said:
Give me a break - you said the outrage was fake and the protesters idiots.
Click to expand...
The outrage is faux and the protestors are idiots. That is pretty clear, as only idiots protest over false narratives, which is being driven by their own blind bias.
 
VanceMack said:
I think you can attribute your own comments to yourself. I have consistently said...we dont KNOW what happened and as OTHERS have said, perhaps we should WAIT before we go about building crosses.

The law enforcement personnel in question are colleagues of the man. They know him better than you or I and they stand by him. Heaven forbid there be a few people standing FOR him with so many people already convinced of his guilt.
Click to expand...

I don't know either, which is why I've pointed out 100 times the investigation is ongoing, the grand jury hasn't reached a decision, etc.

OK, I guess I just KNOW if it was my unarmed son killed or my unarmed best friend killed and the cops were wearing bracelets declaring their support for the killer, and patrolling protests of the killing of my son or friend or neighbor, it wouldn't give me confidence that the police who SERVE ME AND MY NEIGHBORS could be trusted. I'd look at it as a giant FU to my community by people we pay to serve US. If you can put yourself in their shoes and honestly believe otherwise, I guess that's fine. We just disagree.

But as a matter of policy, that many would feel as I do is enough reason to ban the officers from wearing them. They can show their support on their own time, off duty, out of uniform. Not while they're getting paid to serve that community that disagrees with them. I'd think this decision by the Police Chief (or whatever his title is) probably took about 5 seconds to reach, or as long as it took the question to be asked. The answer, "Are you kidding me? Hell no you can't wear that stuff on duty! Are you high? We're trying to defuse this situation, not make it worse!"
 
Excon said:
What do you not understand about it being turned over to another force?
Click to expand...

That's not an answer. Turned over means they did nothing, took no statements, did no forensic work, heard nothing, saw nothing?

:naughty
No, the bottom line is irrational folks thinks it shows bias where none exists.
Click to expand...

Irrational = disagrees with you I guess.
:doh
You are doing it again.
You should have paid attention to what CanadaJohn told you.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is your statement made no sense, and perhaps I misinterpreted it. In my view, there should be no bias by police. You said the bias should be in favor of "law enforcement" which I took to mean their fellow officers. If not that I don't know what your point was.

The outrage is faux and the protestors are idiots. That is pretty clear, as only idiots protest over false narratives.
Click to expand...

LIke I said you're proudly biased, and it shows.
 
Excon said:
:doh
The community has no valid point so it would be extremely stupid to purposely put oneself in their position.
Click to expand...

Obviously you're the only relevant arbiter of that, and so if anyone disagrees with you, it would be 'stupid' to even consider that other person's point of view. And this is true even if those people are the community you've been elected/hired to serve..... I think I'm getting a good handle on your position.

BTW, if you had paid any attention at all to the protesters and what they're saying, the attitude you're supporting here - community of Ferguson, the people who it is our job to serve, if you don't like it, tough shiate, you're stupid and irrational - is sort of the reason for the protests. The shooting was just a spark, and hardly the only reason for the protests.
 
Last edited:
JasperL said:
I don't know either, which is why I've pointed out 100 times the investigation is ongoing, the grand jury hasn't reached a decision, etc.

OK, I guess I just KNOW if it was my unarmed son killed or my unarmed best friend killed and the cops were wearing bracelets declaring their support for the killer, and patrolling protests of the killing of my son or friend or neighbor, it wouldn't give me confidence that the police who SERVE ME AND MY NEIGHBORS could be trusted. I'd look at it as a giant FU to my community by people we pay to serve US. If you can put yourself in their shoes and honestly believe otherwise, I guess that's fine. We just disagree.

But as a matter of policy, that many would feel as I do is enough reason to ban the officers from wearing them. They can show their support on their own time, off duty, out of uniform. Not while they're getting paid to serve that community that disagrees with them. I'd think this decision by the Police Chief (or whatever his title is) probably took about 5 seconds to reach, or as long as it took the question to be asked. The answer, "Are you kidding me? Hell no you can't wear that stuff on duty! Are you high? We're trying to defuse this situation, not make it worse!"
Click to expand...
:doh
Community? iLOL
A small percentage of irrational folks does not a community make.
Good to see that you place yourself amongst them.


JasperL said:
That's not an answer. Turned over means they did nothing, took no statements, did no forensic work, heard nothing, saw nothing?
Click to expand...
Yes it is an answer. Turned over, means turned over. Do you really not understand that?


JasperL said:
Irrational = disagrees with you I guess.
Click to expand...
:naughty
Irrational means supporting a false narrative when it is already known to be false.


JasperL said:
I think the problem is your statement made no sense, and perhaps I misinterpreted it. In my view, there should be no bias by police. You said the bias should be in favor of "law enforcement" which I took to mean their fellow officers. If not that I don't know what your point was.
Click to expand...
The statement made prefect sense. It was your inability to understand which led you astray.
"Law enforcement" is vastly different from "law enforcement personnel". Rational folks know that.


JasperL said:
LIke I said you're proudly biased, and it shows.
Click to expand...
:lamo
Idiots are idiots. Believing a false narrative after it has already been exposed as false, is idiotic. Stating such is a bias for the truth. So thank you. I am proudly biased for the truth.


JasperL said:
Excon said:
:doh
The community has no valid point so it would be extremely stupid to purposely put oneself in their position.
Click to expand...
Obviously you're the only relevant arbiter of that, and so if anyone disagrees with you, it would be 'stupid' to even consider that other person's point of view. And this is true even if those people are the community you've been elected/hired to serve..... I think I'm getting a good handle on your position.
Click to expand...

And again, the problem here is the acceptance of a false narrative and the faux outrage by the idiots in the community.




JasperL said:
BTW, if you had paid any attention at all to the protesters and what they're saying, the attitude you're supporting here - community of Ferguson, the people who it is our job to serve, if you don't like it, tough shiate, you're stupid and irrational - is sort of the reason for the protests. The shooting was just a spark, and hardly the only reason for the protests.
Click to expand...
They are protesting bs, and you know it.
 
Excon said:
:doh
Community? iLOL
A small percentage of irrational folks does not a community make.
Good to see that you place yourself amongst them.
Click to expand...

Good to see you disregard them.

Yes it is an answer. Turned over, means turned over. Do you really not understand that?
Click to expand...

Turned over means they did nothing, took no statements, did no forensic work, heard nothing, saw nothing?

Irrational means supporting a false narrative when it is already known to be false.
Click to expand...

You've declared that in your opinion the narrative is false. I wasn't aware of anyone appointing you as sole arbiter, but it's good to know your opinion matters - their doesn't.

:lamo
Idiots are idiots. Believing a false narrative after it has already been exposed as false, is idiotic. Stating such is a bias for the truth. So thank you. I am proudly biased for the truth.
Click to expand...

The grand jury has heard the evidence and come to a conclusion? Weird - I thought they were still weeks away from a decision.

And again, the problem here is the acceptance of a false narrative and the faux outrage by the idiots in the community.
Click to expand...

And, again, I'm glad the people of Ferguson's views on this are irrelevant.

They are protesting bs, and you know it.
Click to expand...

Actually, I don't. I don't live there, and haven't interacted with the police, and haven't heard all the evidence, nor has their been a decision by the grand jury nor have any of the investigations been concluded. I'm glad you "know" everything that matters. I guess you're clairvoyant or something - which is nice. What's the stock market going to be in 2 months?
 
JasperL said:
Good to see you disregard them.
Click to expand...
I disregard their false claims as any rational person should.


JasperL said:
Turned over means they did nothing, took no statements, did no forensic work, heard nothing, saw nothing?
Click to expand...
I see you chose not to understand what it means. Figures.
But I must say I am surprised that you seem to think that patrol Officers would be doing the work of another's agencies Detectives.
How odd.


JasperL said:
You've declared that in your opinion the narrative is false. I wasn't aware of anyone appointing you as sole arbiter, but it's good to know your opinion matters - their doesn't.
Click to expand...
:doh No, that is what the evidence indicates.


JasperL said:
The grand jury has heard the evidence and come to a conclusion? Weird - I thought they were still weeks away from a decision.
Click to expand...
Stop trying to confuse the issue.
What the protestors are protesting, is a false narrative which has already been shown to be false by the evidence.
You do not need a GJ or trial to tell you that.

Shot in the back, shown to be false.
The initial witnesses have changed their account from his hands were up surrendering, to they were just going up a little.
Not moving towards the Officer, to evidence saying he was.

They are protesting on a false narrative. And that is because they are irrational and likely don't care about the truth, only their biases.


JasperL said:
And, again, I'm glad the people of Ferguson's views on this are irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Good to know. Then the Officers wearing bracelets in support of Officer Wilson shouldn't matter one bit.

And the Officers not wearing or covering their name tags to protect their self and their families should be acceptable as well.
There is absolutely no rational reason why anybody should oppose such.


JasperL said:
Actually, I don't.
Click to expand...
So you are debating not knowing the evidence? Figures.
 
apdst said:
Would you support such enforcement if it was a symbol you agreed with?
Click to expand...

Yes. Police shouldn't be displaying political or controversial symbols on their person. I assume you'd support it if they had I Stand With Obama bracelets?
 
Excon said:
I disregard their false claims as any rational person should.
Click to expand...

And you know they're false claims because you are clairvoyant. I understand.

I see you chose not to understand what it means. Figures.
But I must say I am surprised that you seem to think that patrol Officers would be doing the work of another's agencies Detectives.
How odd.
Click to expand...

I asked a series of questions. If you know the answers are all no, just say that. No, they didn't talk to any witnesses, none of the Ferguson police saw anything, heard anything, none will testify if there is a trial, etc.

Shot in the back, shown to be false.
The initial witnesses have changed their account from his hands were up surrendering, to they were just going up a little.
Not moving towards the Officer, to evidence saying he was.
Click to expand...

If you've been paying any attention, at best we have conflicting accounts. You know which of the conflicting accounts are true and which are false because you're clairvoyant, but others don't have this gift and so are relying on investigations and a grand jury to work out the conflicts, at least to some extent. You should be patient with those of us without your rare abilities!

They are protesting on a false narrative. And that is because they are irrational and likely don't care about the truth, only their biases.
Click to expand...

Riiigggggghhhhttttt! And you're unbiased and only interested in the facts!

Good to know. Then the Officers wearing bracelets in support of Officer Wilson shouldn't matter one bit.

And the Officers not wearing or covering their name tags to protect their self and their families should be acceptable as well.
There is absolutely no rational reason why anybody should oppose such.
Click to expand...

Of course no one should oppose such. Why in the world would people who the officers serve want to know the names of the police officers involved in police actions?

I have to say it's pretty funny that you just completely reverse the roles here. The police serve the people of Ferguson. You act like they have the right to tell the people they serve to go to hell if they don't like they way they're doing things. Let's just say that's a 180 from the normal conservative view of government employees.

So you are debating not knowing the evidence? Figures.
Click to expand...

I just don't have the gift of clairvoyance. Wish I did! In the normal world of ordinary humans, the evidence is conflicting.
 
Sherman123 said:
Yes. Police shouldn't be displaying political or controversial symbols on their person. I assume you'd support it if they had I Stand With Obama bracelets?
Click to expand...

Sure. Why not?
 
JasperL said:
And you know they're false claims because you are clairvoyant. I understand.
Click to expand...
It is the evidence that makes the claims false, so all you show you understand, is your dishonesty in discussing this.


JasperL said:
I asked a series of questions. If you know the answers are all no, just say that.
Click to expand...
Stop playing games.
Again.
I see you chose not to understand what it means. Figures.
But I must say I am surprised that you seem to think that patrol Officers would be doing the work of another's agencies Detectives.
How odd. ​


JasperL said:
No, they didn't talk to any witnesses, none of the Ferguson police saw anything, heard anything, none will testify if there is a trial, etc.
Click to expand...
:doh
More irrelevancy to that being discussed.
Their wearing of bracelets does not influence any investigation, as they are not investigating it. It is like you do not understand that.
Nor does wearing a bracelet have any influence on the irrelevancies you mention above. You are doing nothing but speaking nonsense.


JasperL said:
If you've been paying any attention, at best we have conflicting accounts. You know which of the conflicting accounts are true and which are false because you're clairvoyant, but others don't have this gift and so are relying on investigations and a grand jury to work out the conflicts, at least to some extent.
Click to expand...
This is nothing more than a failure on your part to pay attention and discern.
People copying what others initially said, does not make for conflicting reports, especially when those initial reports have since been shown to be false.
Shot in the back, shown to be false.
The initial witnesses have changed their account from his hands were up surrendering, to they were just going up a little.
Not moving towards the Officer, to evidence saying he was.​
What is it you do not understand about the above?


Your failure to discern is not my problem, but it is yours.
Learn the evidence and learn how to look at it in toto.


JasperL said:
Riiigggggghhhhttttt! And you're unbiased and only interested in the facts!
Click to expand...
:lamo
Your absurd comment does not refute what I said.
They are protesting on a false narrative. And that is because they are irrational and likely don't care about the truth, only their biases. ​


JasperL said:
Of course no one should oppose such. Why in the world would people who the officers serve want to know the names of the police officers involved in police actions?
Click to expand...
You seem to be skipping over the fact that badge numbers suffice.
So again.
And the Officers not wearing or covering their name tags to protect their self and their families should be acceptable as well.
There is absolutely no rational reason why anybody should oppose such. ​


JasperL said:
I have to say it's pretty funny that you just completely reverse the roles here. The police serve the people of Ferguson. You act like they have the right to tell the people they serve to go to hell if they don't like they way they're doing things. Let's just say that's a 180 from the normal conservative view of government employees.
Click to expand...
You are speaking nonsense again.



JasperL said:
I just don't have the gift of clairvoyance. Wish I did! In the normal world of ordinary humans, the evidence is conflicting.
Click to expand...
One does not need to be clairvoyant to know that when the initial statement turned out to be fabrications that those that followed with the same info were fabrications as well.
Why you are not able to discern only speaks to your own bias.

The protestors are protesting based on a false narrative.
 
radcen said:
When you're dealing with an irrational element, yes, it is unprofessional. This is a clear-cut example where wisdom and forethought needs to trump emotion. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Click to expand...
We can disagree. Do you let the lowest common denominator choose what you do?
 
JasperL said:
While wearing a uniform, on duty, yes, it's unprofessional to take sides in an active investigation that is the subject of protests by the community THEY SERVE.
Click to expand...
They are not taking sides in an active investigation. They are showing support for one of their brothers who was hurt by a thug. The dead thug is supported by many live criminals.
 
TheNextEra said:
Yes, but it is up for the Police Departments and not the DOJ to make this call. There is no reason for the DOJ to even make a request like this and only makes the matter worse. By publicizing this, they now have made an even MORE volatile situation worse.
Click to expand...
I believe that is their intention.
 
JasperL said:
It's indefensible for anyone in a position of authority wearing any bracelets announcing their bias in this case to those who expect impartial enforcement of the law. It's so obviously wrong that I can't believe conservatives have lined up to defend that kind of thing by the police, of all people.
Click to expand...
I believe your thinking about this incorrectly. A police officer was harmed by a thug. The police officer's friends support him by wearing a bracelet as he recovers.

What do you believe is on that bracelet that says they have taken sides about their friend's guilt or innocence?

I believed the thug got what took to stop him. The rest of the criminals in that community need to be stopped from their looting, their fire starting and their general lawlessness.

Do you let the lowest common denominators in your community decide what you can and cannot do?
 
JasperL said:
So if they're not protesting they should be allowed to wear anything? Like pink knee socks, yellow rain boots with white polka dots and an "I'm with Stupid ===>" T shirt over their blues?

Obviously I missed your point too... :lol:
Click to expand...

Do they have a dress code that says they can't wear bracelets or not? We weren't talking about shirts over their blues, were we?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom