• 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!

Officer "Go **** Yourself" Threatens to kill journalist

Jerry said:
I never said they were :)
Click to expand...

Wasn't trying to imply you were. But most of them seem to believe and/or wish they are military. Just check out the ridiculous equipment they have. Police agencies received some $450 million worth of equipment from the military last year alone! What the hell do they need an MRAP for? .50 cal machine guns? They just want toys. Some want to beat up on people and get away with it. Sociopathy at its finest.
 
Jerry said:
Ahh is that why you assume the cop had an assult-weapon and not an assult-rifle? You should know that many police departments have assult-rifles eventhough they arent military.
Click to expand...

Why such a stubborn insistence on distinguishing between the two? A rifle is a weapon, thus an assault rifle is an assault weapon. Similarly, an assault knife would be an assault weapon as well. Sound good? Good! We're all happy again.
 
Bodhisattva said:
By comparing what they are doing to military training your are attempting to give legitimacy to their actions... pathetic. :(
Click to expand...
Legitimacy to yelling, cursing & agressive posture, yes. Those are perfectly valid demonstrations of the will to use force.

Raising a gun as a threat, however, is not valid. That's a crime. A bystander would have been justified in shooting that cop for it.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I can never tell if it is obtuse or clever with you... addressing "the post". :lol:

... of course "the content and context" are what is relevant... but you addressed "the post". Nice! :lol:
Click to expand...
I think you're the first person who's ever realy cought onto that. Much like how one can respond to a question without answering the question.
 
If this is the same video I viewed earlier today, that cop was out of control. He looked scared to death and it looked like he had his finger on the trigger of his weapon. His actions could have turned the protest into an even more hostile situation.
 
TNAR said:
Wasn't trying to imply you were. But most of them seem to believe and/or wish they are military. Just check out the ridiculous equipment they have. Police agencies received some $450 million worth of equipment from the military last year alone! What the hell do they need an MRAP for? .50 cal machine guns? They just want toys. Some want to beat up on people and get away with it. Sociopathy at its finest.
Click to expand...
The MRAP I'm not worried about. Those were made for a war we're trying to get out of so it was either give all those MRAPs to hadji (**** that) or bring them home and re-purpose them. An MRAP isn't going to make or brake a civil disterbance, its just an armored truck.

The .50cal machinegun is intended for use against equiptment and structures. Does the US forsee a confrontation with a mexican cartell? This weapon systom is perfectly useless against a civil uprising or insurrection.
 
TNAR said:
Why such a stubborn insistence on distinguishing between the two?
Click to expand...
Getting it wrong gives people the wrong immage, and then the next time another voly of gun control comes around and people hear "assult weapon" they will recall the immage of this bully cop and be more inclined to support some gun control....when in fact the gun control proposed won't even adress the actual kind of gun that officer was actualy holding.

Its a bait & switch.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
It seems this officer was merly reacting instead of making a deliborate and meashured 'violence of action'. He shouldn't be a cop regardless, imo.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




It sounds like the man made a mistake.

Maybe he was having a bad day.

Who reacts perfectly 100% of the time?

I don't believe hat person exists.

Most of us do the best that we can do and hope that it's good enough.
 
shrubnose said:
It sounds like the man made a mistake.

Maybe he was having a bad day.

Who reacts perfectly 100% of the time?

I don't believe hat person exists.

Most of us do the best that we can do and hope that it's good enough.
Click to expand...
When you put a gun in your hand, you must be perfect in all ways. If you can't be perfect, don't pick the gun up. Go be a sucessful tradesman, but the profession of arms is not for you.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Screaming "STAY BACK OR I WILL F*CKING SHOOT YOU!!! DO YOU F*CKING UNDERSTAND?!?!" is basically what the military explicitly trains you to do in those kinds of situations. lol
Click to expand...
And that is why they should not be police officers.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Yes but when protests turn violent, like has happened in Ferguson, an officer's role changes accordingly. They are now placed in a situation where contain and control are the main objectives. Much like the role of the military.
Click to expand...

Is that some kind of justification for taxpayers to fund and maintain armored personnel carriers, drones and military grade weapons? You serious support that just in case once in a blue moon there's a violent protest?
 
I just don't get this term "Outside People" or "People From Outside" Ferguson.

The media is always claiming ....

People "From Outside" came to cause problems and to encourage this civil unrest."

Why is it not said this way?.....

"Protest Supporters from around the nation came to cause problems and to encourage this civil unrest."

Why are they being described with a suspicious sounding term like "Outsiders"?

Were there any "Outsiders" at the last political fundraising event in support of the Republican/Democrat candidates and their platform and/or causes?

Calm
 
Last edited:
Who declared this civil unrest as being "Over" or "Finished" and that Ferguson is "Moving On"?

Is it considered "Over" because the National Guard was pulled out?

Do you think that the local police force has an overwhelming desire now to return to policing Ferguson? That they are all standing around anxiously waiting for the first opportunity to begin patrolling the streets again?

I think that the only "Respect" and "Sense Of Authority" that the local police enjoy in the future will only be gotten at the point of a gun?

As the economy continues to crumble, civil unrest will only increase.

Nobody is "Moving On" except the media and the politicians.

There is a huge difference between "Moving On" and "Moving Forward".

Calm
 
Bodhisattva said:
Is there any difference anymore?
Click to expand...

As soon as they start shooting people to quell dissent... No, there won't be any difference.

It should be clear based on the response to the riots how the agenda is for a war against Americans in America.

If needed I'll elaborate further, but this response is about stopping the press, not about stopping the riots.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Eh. He lost his temper, from the looks of things. I don't think he was actually planning on shooting anyone.

Honestly though, I have a hard time getting worked up over this kind of thing.

Screaming "STAY BACK OR I WILL F*CKING SHOOT YOU!!! DO YOU F*CKING UNDERSTAND?!?!" is basically what the military explicitly trains you to do in those kinds of situations. lol
Click to expand...

The police are not supposed to be the military, and threatening to shoot unarmed civilians is out of line.
 
TNAR said:
Personal liability. That would help things out a bit, I think. Take the lawsuit awards out of their paychecks.

Of course, firing all government police agents and allowing individuals to determine their own security needs would be much better, but I realize that most people are afraid of self-reliance.
Click to expand...

This was tried, prior to the last century in fact, and it failed miserably. There was so much corruption and bribery and favoritism and so much more that we decided this simply does not work.
 
Ikari said:
The police are not supposed to be the military, and threatening to shoot unarmed civilians is out of line.
Click to expand...

Except this was done to media, and the looters / rioters are left mostly untouched.

This is still an escalation from the third night where they were lining people up with the red dot on the rifle.

They have tried to tell the media / people to turn off their cameras, this was moments before they launched a series of flash bangs, tear gas, and rubber bullets. This happened a day or two before the police attacked a camera crew, dismantled their setup, and told the world that they HELPED the media.

This is training the police on martial law...
 
roguenuke said:
This was tried, prior to the last century in fact, and it failed miserably. There was so much corruption and bribery and favoritism and so much more that we decided this simply does not work.
Click to expand...

You need to read more history books. Private police forces which do not enjoy state privilege have been enormously successful throughout history. I'll dig up some sources for you.
 
TNAR said:
You need to read more history books. Private police forces which do not enjoy state privilege have been enormously successful throughout history. I'll dig up some sources for you.
Click to expand...

Not in this country they haven't. I studied law enforcement, including the history. We have not done well with allowing private police forces to run the system. It simply does not work well, not having them alone enforcing laws of the country.
 
'Go **** yourself'?

Maybe the officer in question was concerned that the individual was unlovable and was suggesting a course of action to alleviate sexual frustration and/or loneliness.

;)
 
Gathomas88 said:
Well, again... Given how they were shouting at people not to throw things, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that those people really weren't all that "peaceful" in the first place. They looked a lot more like an angry mob going out of their way to provoke a response.

Frankly, they got what they were looking for.

I do agree that the police officer's response was out of line. However, that is exactly why he was removed from the situation by the other officers on the scene, and has since been suspended pending investigation.

If I were to put money on it, I'd bet that the cop in question probably got hit by an object thrown by some belligerent jackass in the crowd, and that's why he flipped out.
Click to expand...

Aren't you either a cop or ex-cop?
 
DVSentinel said:
The journalist caused all this mess and keep agitating it.
Click to expand...

Right, this reporter cause this cop to point his gun at the crowd, threaten to shoot them and then cuss at them. Damn journalist!
 
Gathomas88 said:
No, just military. I know quite a few cops, however.
Click to expand...

Understood. I asked because I thought you had mentioned you were a former law enforcement officer. Sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom