• 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!

One NYPD Cop Dead, Another Critical After They Were Shot in Vehicle[W:132]

For such a " noble cause " it sure is fragile.

If it can be brought down by a few bad apples how " noble " can it be ?

The truth is if it was a cause based and backed by substance and not false narratives no amount of bad apples could bring it down.

The central tenant of a Noble cause remains no matter what someone does to undermine it.

The central tenants of this " cause " are all based on a BS plattitudes and misinformation. It was only a matter of time.

Damn right!
 
There's video of Eric Garner resisting arrest and it makes no difference.

The instance of Garner being physically taken down for a NON-violent (alleged) crime is ONE event...which compares poorly with the aforementioned SIXTY percent drop in total instances of use of force by police once they began wearing body cameras.
 
Didn't say you did. I was responding to your comment regarding the "protesters". imo, some protesters act without knowing the facts.

Yes, body cameras seem to help.

Think about it. The drop in complaints and use of force may have more to do with the fact the citizen knows the their actions are being recorded. It is more difficult for one to claim police excessive force when your actions are recorded.

The sixty percent drop in reports of use of force isn't what's reported by the civilians - it's what's reported by the cops themselves.
 
For such a " noble cause " it sure is fragile.

If it can be brought down by a few bad apples how " noble " can it be ?

You're taking my words as if I'm saying it's a lost cause. I don't think the idea that police officers should be prosecuted like every other citizen is a lost cause, but it only takes one crowd chanting "kill a cop" to delegitimize the rest of them at that moment. Same with OWS - the idea that trading should be fair and ethical is a noble cause, and a cause that could still win out one day, but the protests were quickly hijacked by those with ulterior motives.

It's no different than when the tea party throws a protest and someone hangs Obama in effigy and everyone gets labeled racist. It's not to say that the cause of lower taxes isn't a noble cause, it's just that some #$*&#$s ruined it for everyone else at the time.
 
The instance of Garner being physically taken down for a NON-violent (alleged) crime is ONE event...which compares poorly with the aforementioned SIXTY percent drop in total instances of use of force by police once they began wearing body cameras.

My point is, it won't make these incidents go away. Eric Garner resisting arrest is a prime example.
 
My point is, it won't make these incidents go away. Eric Garner resisting arrest is a prime example.

Guy, the FIVE guys had Garner on the ground...and they STILL continued to choke him. Which is why the medical examiner ruled it a homicide.

And of course the body cameras wouldn't make the incidents ALL go away...but it makes SIXTY percent of them go away. Don't you think that's worth it? Or do you somehow like the level of violence as it is?
 
Guy, the FIVE guys had Garner on the ground...and they STILL continued to choke him. Which is why the medical examiner ruled it a homicide.

And of course the body cameras wouldn't make the incidents ALL go away...but it makes SIXTY percent of them go away. Don't you think that's worth it? Or do you somehow like the level of violence as it is?

Guy, he resisted the entire time. He tried to break out, twice. And even with the video evidence, a rebellion is underway.
 
Guy, he resisted the entire time. He tried to break out, twice. And even with the video evidence, a rebellion is underway.

When someone's choking you, are you going to lie down there and let them continue to choke you? What is ANY human being going to do when he or she is being choked to death????

And you didn't answer my question about the body cameras.
 
Guy, the FIVE guys had Garner on the ground...and they STILL continued to choke him. Which is why the medical examiner ruled it a homicide.

And of course the body cameras wouldn't make the incidents ALL go away...but it makes SIXTY percent of them go away. Don't you think that's worth it? Or do you somehow like the level of violence as it is?

Yep. Its worth it.
Body camera's seem to make everyone calmer.

That said. Local/State govt. that buy the camera's should not raise taxes/fees. There is enough give away programs the money can be found in.
One will also need to consider upkeep/maintenance of the equipment, record storage policies, chain of custody of data, etc. Those expenses need to also be accounted for.

Bottom line, police can go ahead and implement a body camera program. Just don't ask for more money to do it.
 
When someone's choking you, are you going to lie down there and let them continue to choke you? What is ANY human being going to do when he or she is being choked to death????

And you didn't answer my question about the body cameras.

I'm not going to give a cop a reason to take me down! How god damn hard is it to understand that part?
 
I never said they were...but there's been enough wrong actions by the police that people have taken notice. That's why I'm a big fan of body cameras for police...and they work:

Police officers in the small city of Rialto in San Bernardino County have been wearing cameras since 2012. Rialto Police Chief William A. Farrar, working with a Cambridge University researcher, found two big results: Complaints against his officers declined by 88 percent and officer use of force declined by 60 percent.

Think about that. If the police weren't at least sometimes doing that which is wrong, why would the use of body cameras result in such a dramatic drop, not just in complaints against the police but - and this is the important factor - a 60 percent drop in the use of force by the police?

My concern with these cameras, paid for at public expense, is that they do not reduce crime. In many cases they may actually increase crime because of increased "need" for plea bargaining (the courts would get WAY busissier). The basic idea of a plea bargain is to save the time/effort of a trial in exchange for pretending that a lesser offense was comitted. The (serious) crime still happened but is reported as if some lesser crime happened.

Beyond the numbers, Farrar said the body cameras have also led to speedier internal investigations, an increase in criminal prosecutions, a rise in defendant plea bargains, greater officer professionalism and more public trust. He’s continued to monitor citizen complaints and use of force and seen sustained sharp decreases compared with the year before officers had cameras.

The result is that arrest rates (for officer witnessed crime) go up, police complaints go down, but convictions (for the actual offense committed but NOT caught on officer cam) go down as well. What we (the public) need is honesty in prosecutions, whether the offense is by a citizen or by a police officer. Far too few cases are ever presented to a judge/jury an are "dealt with" using plea bargains that are rarely, if ever, discussed with the victim.
 
Wrong answer. Whatever came before, the guy's on top of you and choking the life out of you. What are you going to do?

A cop isn't going to be taking me down. What part of that don't you understand?
 
A cop isn't going to be taking me down. What part of that don't you understand?

What part of "yeah, it CAN happen" do you not understand? Oh, wait, let me guess - you're perfect and no cop would ever, ever make the mistake of thinking you're anything other than the most perfect citizen that ever trod the streets of America....
 
What part of "yeah, it CAN happen" do you not understand? Oh, wait, let me guess - you're perfect and no cop would ever, ever make the mistake of thinking you're anything other than the most perfect citizen that ever trod the streets of America....

If you're confronted by a cop, are you going to cooperate, or are you going to fight your way out of it?

I'm a truck driver. I deal with cops all the time.
 
A cop isn't going to be taking me down. What part of that don't you understand?

Here we have an attempt to avoid answering a hypothetical question by relying on clairvoyance. It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for 'em.
 
Here we have an attempt to avoid answering a hypothetical question by relying on clairvoyance. It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for 'em.

I did answer the question. Nice try, Cotton.
 
I did answer the question. Nice try, Cotton.

No you didn't. His question requested a yes or no answer. Here it is again:

When someone's choking you, are you going to lie down there and let them continue to choke you?

It's a simple yes or no answer apdst, can you answer it?
 
No you didn't. His question requested a yes or no answer. Here it is again:

When someone's choking you, are you going to lie down there and let them continue to choke you?

It's a simple yes or no answer apdst, can you answer it?

And...again...I'm not going to give a cop a reason to take me down.

It wasn't a civilian assaulting Eric Garner. It was a cop enforcing the law and Eric Garner resisting arrest.
 
And...again...I'm not going to give a cop a reason to take me down.

It has already been explained to you that this is not an answer to the question being asked. It's like if someone asked a Smurf: Are you blue? And the Smurf replied, "I don't believe in colors." - The answer has nothing to do with the question at hand. He asked you about a hypothetical situation and the possible answers are affirmative (yes), negative (no) or what you would do in such a situation. So apdst, last time:

When someone's choking you, are you going to lie down there and let them continue to choke you?

Yes or no?
 
Guy, he resisted the entire time. He tried to break out, twice. And even with the video evidence, a rebellion is underway.

That is a fact of the case that can not be spun-if he hadn't resisted arrest, he'd probably be out on the street selling loosies today.
 
It has already been explained to you that this is not an answer to the question being asked. It's like if someone asked a Smurf: Are you blue? And the Smurf replied, "I don't believe in colors." - The answer has nothing to do with the question at hand. He asked you about a hypothetical situation and the possible answers are affirmative (yes), negative (no) or what you would do in such a situation. So apdst, last time:

When someone's choking you, are you going to lie down there and let them continue to choke you?

Yes or no?

If you were confronted by a cop, ordered to cease and desist, are you going cooperate, or fight your way out of it?
 
That is a fact of the case that can not be spun-if he hadn't resisted arrest, he'd probably be out on the street selling loosies today.

The Libbos are sticking to a fake narrative with Garner, the way they are with Brown.

Have you noticed that stupid-assed, flamebait question that Glen and Hatuey keep parroting? That proves my point.
 
If you were confronted by a cop, ordered to cease and desist, are you going cooperate, or fight your way out of it?

Lmao, cops can't order you to cease and desist. I don't think you actually know what that means. As to whether I'd fight or cooperate if a cop confronted me, I'd politely ask why it is I'm being ordered to do whatever. If a second cop then decided approach me from behind and put me in a chokehold, I'd defend myself from it just like I would any unidentified threat. :shrug: Before you get too excited, the answer is in bold.

Anywho, you going to answer the question or not? It's simple:

When someone's choking you, are you going to lie down there and let them continue to choke you?


Yes or no?
 
The Libbos are sticking to a fake narrative with Garner, the way they are with Brown.

Have you noticed that stupid-assed, flamebait question that Glen and Hatuey keep parroting? That proves my point.

Why am I getting the impression that some of these people are laying awake at night worrying about being choked by policemen?

In my list of things I'm afraid will happen to me, choking by cop falls right behind getting raped by Brad Pitt and right before getting kicked in the head by a herd of stampeding elephants in New Hampshire.
 
Back
Top Bottom