• 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!

Obama tells cops: Admit

I know, show me where I said I would throw a tantrum. I only stated I'm not going to blindly follow any command a cop gives me.

Then just do what you are told with your eyes wide open.

You understand that here you are effectively agreeing with what the President said, right?

If any of the blame falls on the police, then admitting it is a step towards reconciliation.

Obama didn't say there was no blame on the other side.

Here's the quote for reference:

Yes, he is right about that, there needs to be mutual respect on both sides. I for one, in my normal police duties never had a problem, because I was smiling, friendly and approached most activities by the Black community as thou I were just curious, instead of dictatorial. A little levity goes a long way. Treating everyone with respect, goes a long way. I did both.

I'd wave, say hi and ask questions. I was never demanding or real authoritative, unless, there was an egregious crime in progress. Then, all bets were off.

I do realize that in most communities, the cops are hated. Sometimes it's justified, many times it isn't.
 
That little childish statement. No one has suggested you follow the officer's commands blindly, just that you follow them. You can speak and politely say, "I do not wish to be searched" while following his/her commands. Again, at the roadside is not the place to adjudicate your case.

Call it me childish if you want for stating I'm not going to just follow any command given to me. :shrug:

I've cooperated with police many times so it's not like I would be unreasonable or childish about it.
 
What he should have said was: If we "The American Public" would simply hold ourselves to the same standards that we demand of our police, then the killing would stop.

djl

Precisely!

That little childish statement. No one has suggested you follow the officer's commands blindly, just that you follow them. You can speak and politely say, "I do not wish to be searched" while following his/her commands. Again, at the roadside is not the place to adjudicate your case.

Unless you want to get out of a ticket. That';s the place to lobby for and plead your case.

Yawn. Cool story, bro.

But, of course, you're famously emotional and rant all the time.

(202) 456-1111

No, he's not doing that.

Thanks for proving my point about you being ruled by your emotions.

Please calm down.

I'm pretty calm actually, just sick and tired of all obama's BS. My rants may be construed as emotional, but they really aren't. After being on this planet for all these years and seeing what a class President really is(Reagan), it's hard to accept anything less.

Is that Obie's direct number? Are you Eric Holder, or Valerie Jarrett?
 
Obama: Police Can 'Make the Job of Being a Cop a Lot Safer' by Admitting Their Failures

America's police will be safer when they admit they have a problem, Pres. Obama declared on Sunday at a bilateral event with the prime minister of Spain in Madrid.

Fielding a question on Sunday, July 10, about the violence against police in Dallas, Texas last week, which left five officers dead, Obama said police officers will be safer once they acknowledge their failures:

Obama: Police Can 'Make the Job of Being a Cop a Lot Safer' by Admitting Their Failures | MRCTV



WTF? Talk about putting the blame on the wrong people!! obama is the biggest ****ing asshole President, bar none!

This is OUTRAGEOUS!!! :2mad:

Oh look, someone other than a Republican talks about personal responsibility, and the right blows a gasket! Such irony... :lol:
 
Yes, he is right about that, there needs to be mutual respect on both sides. I for one, in my normal police duties never had a problem, because I was smiling, friendly and approached most activities by the Black community as thou I were just curious, instead of dictatorial. A little levity goes a long way. Treating everyone with respect, goes a long way. I did both.

Truly an inspiration for us all.

It sounds like we'd all agree, officers who aren't able to manage that level of professionalism have a problem they should be working on.

I do realize that in most communities, the cops are hated. Sometimes it's justified, many times it isn't.

I'd say feared is more common. We are conditioned from childhood to fear authority figures. Real incidents of abuse don't help. Neither do whipped up incidents where police did nothing wrong.

Let me ask you something I imagine you've been asked about before:

If you were at the traffic stop in Minnesota, and the guy told you he was armed, and you ordered him to keep still, and he reached for an unknown object, would you have shot him, or would you have given him at least enough time to get his wallet out of his pocket, even if it exposed you to a tiny risk he might come up with a gun?
 
Precisely!



Unless you want to get out of a ticket. That';s the place to lobby for and plead your case.



I'm pretty calm actually, just sick and tired of all obama's BS. My rants may be construed as emotional, but they really aren't. After being on this planet for all these years and seeing what a class President really is(Reagan), it's hard to accept anything less.

Yes, utterly emotional. You can pretend that they're not, but you'll have to play that game alone. And I'm not really all that surprised you'd worship Reagan. He had the most corrupt administration in the modern era, if not all US history.
Is that Obie's direct number? Are you Eric Holder, or Valerie Jarrett?

Call it and find out.
 
You understand that here you are effectively agreeing with what the President said, right?

If any of the blame falls on the police, then admitting it is a step towards reconciliation.

Obama didn't say there was no blame on the other side.

Here's the quote for reference:

With all due respect to Obama and this discussion, he DID acknowledge that some of the BLM rhetoric was problematic. However, he couched that acknowledgement in the framework of "venting" and compared it to the civil rights movement, the suffragette movement, etc.

What is particularly annoying about his statement is that while he asks the police to recognize the frustrations of BLM and suggests that they acknowledge racial disparity he fails to acknowledge that his own rhetoric has generally dismissed the concerns that cops have about being publicly chastised by the White House for "abusing" black youth even in situations where it is later determined that no abuse took place.
 
Call it me childish if you want for stating I'm not going to just follow any command given to me. :shrug:

I've cooperated with police many times so it's not like I would be unreasonable or childish about it.

No, not calling you childish. Just the choice of words in that statement betray a desire to resist at the scene rather than wait and deal with any rights violation in the proper forum.
 
Don't play naïve. What happens after the officer admits making a mistake? Their careers, their very lives, lives of service, are destroyed. They get thrown to the mob.

So it is your stated opinion, then, that when cops do something wrong, they should not admit it, but should instead claim innocence until the state proves otherwise?

Do you see the problem with that? A cop is given preference by every court - if it's his word against the other person's, the cop's word is taken as factual almost every time...and for good cops, that's good. Problem is, when BAD cops ruin peoples' lives, but it's their word against their victims', then the victims are simply s**t out of luck.

That, sir, is why cops need to be held to the highest of standards. If their word is going to be given preference even without any witnesses or evidence to back them up, then they MUST be held to the very highest of standards.

Or are you of the opinion that among the hundreds of thousands of good, honorable, and courageous cops out there, that there are no bad cops at all?
 
Well we certainly can't get the black community to admit that they have a problem with their poor young men and start dealing with them. Start teaching them that the way out of poverty is through hard work. Start teaching them respect for others and themselves. The biggest demographic in this country that this nation has failed at showing them how to be good citizens are poor young black men. But if you point out that what we're seeing is a result of that failure and the resultant actions, you're called a racist.

Ah. I see. In YOUR opinion, blacks are lazy - that's why they have to be taught (in YOUR words) "the way out of poverty is through hard work".

You should check out Stormfront sometime - I suspect you'd find some very like-minded people over there.
 
Ah. I see. In YOUR opinion, blacks are lazy - that's why they have to be taught (in YOUR words) "the way out of poverty is through hard work".

You should check out Stormfront sometime - I suspect you'd find some very like-minded people over there.

Is there such a thing as black culture?


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.
 
Well we certainly can't get the black community to admit that they have a problem with their poor young men and start dealing with them. Start teaching them that the way out of poverty is through hard work. Start teaching them respect for others and themselves. The biggest demographic in this country that this nation has failed at showing them how to be good citizens are poor young black men. But if you point out that what we're seeing is a result of that failure and the resultant actions, you're called a racist.

Is there such a thing as black culture?


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.
 
With all due respect to Obama and this discussion, he DID acknowledge that some of the BLM rhetoric was problematic. However, he couched that acknowledgement in the framework of "venting" and compared it to the civil rights movement, the suffragette movement, etc.

Surely we'd agree police treatment is at the center of civil rights. I think anger, frustration, and despair is understandable from all angles after the recent events.


What is particularly annoying about his statement is that while he asks the police to recognize the frustrations of BLM and suggests that they acknowledge racial disparity he fails to acknowledge that his own rhetoric has generally dismissed the concerns that cops have about being publicly chastised by the White House for "abusing" black youth even in situations where it is later determined that no abuse took place.

I think Obama takes these events personally, and sometimes chimes in before the situation is clear. I don't think that makes him anything like the monster he's consistently portrayed as in some quarters. If you'd like to provide examples of his dismissive rhetoric, I don't think they will stand up to much scrutiny.
 
Surely we'd agree police treatment is at the center of civil rights. I think anger, frustration, and despair is understandable from all angles after the recent events.




I think Obama takes these events personally, and sometimes chimes in before the situation is clear. I don't think that makes him anything like the monster he's consistently portrayed as in some quarters. If you'd like to provide examples of his dismissive rhetoric, I don't think they will stand up to much scrutiny.

Here's his comments on Mike Brown (starts at 6:15). "We lost Mike Brown in heart breaking and tragic circumstances". He calls the cops out for throwing peaceful protesters in jail as Ferguson burned. I'd say that's pretty damned dismissive of the facts and circumstances in that case.



Yes, police actions are absolutely at the center of civil rights but they are only an abuse of civil rights when they are unwarranted and/or geared toward suppressing free speech. When police actions are geared toward stopping a riot or a dangerous felon that isn't suppression of civil rights. There is no right to riot. There is no right to flee police who are conducting a lawful investigation of a complaint. There is no right to resist arrest. While there is a right to protest police actions that right does not extent to interfering with police while they are acting in their official capacity.

There is a well established system in this country for people who feel that they have been abused to seek redress for the actions taken against them but to seek that redress outside the established system is to seek anarchy.
 
Here's his comments on Mike Brown (starts at 6:15). "We lost Mike Brown in heart breaking and tragic circumstances". He calls the cops out for throwing peaceful protesters in jail as Ferguson burned. I'd say that's pretty damned dismissive of the facts and circumstances in that case.

Certainly it was heartbreaking. It's a shame that witnesses sought to mislead the public about what happened from the jump, and it speaks poorly of the relationship between police and the public that people spread those claims to this day.

I don't see anything wrong with Obama's statement that there is no good reason to to jail someone for stating their opinion peacefully. I'd wager few if any were arrested for that alone, in any case.


Yes, police actions are absolutely at the center of civil rights but they are only an abuse of civil rights when they are unwarranted and/or geared toward suppressing free speech. When police actions are geared toward stopping a riot or a dangerous felon that isn't suppression of civil rights. There is no right to riot. There is no right to flee police who are conducting a lawful investigation of a complaint. There is no right to resist arrest. While there is a right to protest police actions that right does not extent to interfering with police while they are acting in their official capacity.

I don't think anyone is claiming these. Obama speaks against using Brown as an excuse for lawlessness in his statement.

Whenever police abuse their authority, it undermines all of our civil rights. I don't think Michael Brown is a good example of this type of abuse. I can't speak to the police response during the riots.


There is a well established system in this country for people who feel that they have been abused to seek redress for the actions taken against them but to seek that redress outside the established system is to seek anarchy.

This system at least appears to be biased in the favor of the police. To some extent it should be, as they are empowered to enforce the law. It speaks to the need for careful selection and training of police, and best use of technology (body cams) to protect everyone involved.
 
Certainly it was heartbreaking. It's a shame that witnesses sought to mislead the public about what happened from the jump, and it speaks poorly of the relationship between police and the public that people spread those claims to this day.

I don't see anything wrong with Obama's statement that there is no good reason to to jail someone for stating their opinion peacefully. I'd wager few if any were arrested for that alone, in any case.




I don't think anyone is claiming these. Obama speaks against using Brown as an excuse for lawlessness in his statement.

Whenever police abuse their authority, it undermines all of our civil rights. I don't think Michael Brown is a good example of this type of abuse. I can't speak to the police response during the riots.




This system at least appears to be biased in the favor of the police. To some extent it should be, as they are empowered to enforce the law. It speaks to the need for careful selection and training of police, and best use of technology (body cams) to protect everyone involved.

Much like plane crashes and traffic accidents we tend to hear a whole lot about the times things go wrong and very little about the times things go right. Yes, there are instances where cops have abused their power but those cases are few and far between. While I understand the desire to have a perfect police force that expectation is unrealistic and to hold cops to a standard of perfection is asinine.

While we shouldn't tolerate failures in the system it only becomes an abusive system when failures are not addressed. I see no evidence of failures regularly falling through the cracks. Bad cops are regularly punished.
 
So it is your stated opinion, then, that when cops do something wrong, they should not admit it, but should instead claim innocence until the state proves otherwise?

Well this is the advice defense lawyers give to EVERYBODY.
 
Truly an inspiration for us all.

It sounds like we'd all agree, officers who aren't able to manage that level of professionalism have a problem they should be working on.



I'd say feared is more common. We are conditioned from childhood to fear authority figures. Real incidents of abuse don't help. Neither do whipped up incidents where police did nothing wrong.

Let me ask you something I imagine you've been asked about before:

If you were at the traffic stop in Minnesota, and the guy told you he was armed, and you ordered him to keep still, and he reached for an unknown object, would you have shot him, or would you have given him at least enough time to get his wallet out of his pocket, even if it exposed you to a tiny risk he might come up with a gun?

That is not a tiny risk. That could be the end of an officer right there, no going home to your family. There is a lot more to this than meets the media eye, there always is.

He fit the description of a armed robbery suspect. They had good probable cause to stop. If the guy tells me that he is armed, and I tell him not to move and he makes a furtive move toward his pocket, I may well have shot him.
W/O being there and seeing what that officer saw, no one can Monday morning quarterback his decision without all the evidence.

I think the girlfriend lied her ass off, just like Michael Browns friends lied their asses off. It happens a lot.

In addition, many of these folks are not the brightest tacks on the card to begin with and have their mouth running 100mph and don't listen!
 
Well this is the advice defense lawyers give to EVERYBODY.

Didja miss the parts about since cops are given such preference in a court of law, that they also need to be held to a higher standard?

And do you really believe there are no bad cops, or that there are no racist cops who use their position against those they don't like?
 
Didja miss the parts about since cops are given such preference in a court of law, that they also need to be held to a higher standard?

And do you really believe there are no bad cops, or that there are no racist cops who use their position against those they don't like?

Wow, so you expect folks to just throw themselves on the sword of whatever passes for social justice among the weak headed today? Yeah, thought so.

Is that what passes for a "higher standard" with you? You seem to hold those who are not police to no standard whatsoever.
 
Yeah, 'cause it's UNAMERICAN to ever admit when we do anything wrong, huh? It's UNAMERICAN to admit when we have failures that need to be addressed, huh?

I guess that's why y'all love Trump. I guess to modern-day conservatives, "Being conservative means you don't have to admit you're wrong about anything ever!"

Kinda like the the BLM and it's false beginnings.
 
If Obama were anti-Police (both of which are equally absurd assertions), he would have most certainly not come out in favor of gun control (like he did) after the Dallas sniping:

Obama Says Police Have Hard Time in Communities With Lots of Guns

Furthermore, he wouldn't be downplaying the Black Lives Matter movement, or the poor relations the Police have toward minorities, and he would have brought up the Drug War.

After Philando Castile’s Killing, Obama Calls Police Shootings ‘an American Issue’

08_MINNESOTA_jp1_master768.jpg



“When incidents like this occur, there’s a big chunk of our citizenry that feels as if, because of the color of their skin, they are not being treated the same, and that hurts, and that should trouble all of us," Mr. Obama said in a statement on Thursday after arriving in Warsaw for a NATO summit.

“This is not just a black issue, not just a Hispanic issue. This is an American issue that we all should care about.”


All the State Capitalist superclass and American Industrial-Militants care about is preservation of the Nation-State, to hell with victims of racially-targeted maniac, militarized police.

Obama focuses on supporting police
Obama Condemns Attack on Police in Baton Rouge, Promises Justice
Obama orders flags at half-staff for Baton Rouge police officers
What President Obama really thinks about the police

Yeah, he's totally anti-cop, despite his countless defenses of them, labeling members of BLM 'cowards', and record-high flags-at-half-mast in memorial of fallen police officers. Not to mention in almost every single encounter he typically paints the victims as 'criminals' or 'misguided'.

:roll:

Make no mistake - Obama is steadfastly pro-Police State.
He will never highlight the police killings as a problem dealing with hatred or racism.
He will never bring up militarized police.
He will never bring up the drug war.
But he (or Hillary) will - surely enough - begin using this as an excuse for further gun control legislation.
Make no mistake.
 
Didja miss the parts about since cops are given such preference in a court of law, that they also need to be held to a higher standard?

And do you really believe there are no bad cops, or that there are no racist cops who use their position against those they don't like?

Truth.

Our criminal justice system...
Our rigged economy (enabled by a corrupt campaign-finance system)...
Our militarized police...
Our rights being threatened...

We all need to wake the **** up. The War on Terror and the War on Drugs are merely smokescreen for a War on The People.
 
Wow, so you expect folks to just throw themselves on the sword of whatever passes for social justice among the weak headed today? Yeah, thought so.

Is that what passes for a "higher standard" with you? You seem to hold those who are not police to no standard whatsoever.

Ah. So if I support police being held to a higher standard - just as everyone in the military (as I was for 20 years) IS held to a higher standard - I am therefore somehow against holding civilians to any standard whatsoever.

Take a course in logic, willya?
 
Back
Top Bottom