• 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

sangha said:
Claiming the proof is in the video and actually posting the proof are two different things.
Click to expand...

It's common sense. Cops don't just threaten violence unless they feel threatened. I'd love to see you as the cop in that situation. A pants soiling may be the outcome. He may have a short temper but his actions say he was under attack, or felt like he was. Why must everything be black & white with you? You seem to never read between the lines or use common sense. I'm guessing you are atheist also since there is no physical evidence of God or a supreme being.
 
JRSaindo said:
It's common sense. Cops don't just threaten violence unless they feel threatened. I'd love to see you as the cop in that situation. A pants soiling may be the outcome. He may have a short temper but his actions say he was under attack, or felt like he was. Why must everything be black & white with you? You seem to never read between the lines or use common sense. I'm guessing you are atheist also since there is no physical evidence of God or a supreme being.
Click to expand...

If you watch the video, you will see that there are other police officers in the immediate area and none of them are showing any indication of feeling threatened, while this officer is spinning around with a pointed weapon. The officer not only demonstrates a poor temper (not a horrible offfense given the situation) but incredibly poor judgement.

And your guess is wrong.
 
sangha said:
I never said anything about why he raised his rifle in the first place. All of my comments referred to his keeping it raised while pointing it at the journalist

I know what happened there and just before. I know the journalist gave him no reason to keep his gun raised and pointed at him. I know that he threatened the journalists life for no good reason.

What happened just before that is as irrelevant as what he had for breakfast that morning.
Click to expand...

Black & white again. I guess context means nothing to you. Only bits of info and you are ready to prosecute.
 
JRSaindo said:
Black & white again. I guess context means nothing to you. Only bits of info and you are ready to prosecute.
Click to expand...

Nothing black and white about taking all available evidence into account. It is black and white to excuse anything a police officer does, no matter how much it endangers innocent people, with excuses like "He's only human"

Every job has requirements that must be fulfilled. If one can't do that, then one should not be in that job.
 
Wiggen said:
Again, I'm willing to bet I've seen a hell of a lot more of the real world in my life than you have in yours. I get it. You love cops. You defend them even when their own department doesn't. That is real loyalty.
Click to expand...
Furthermore, this does not come from a "hatred" of cops. I like knowing that there are cops around dealing with the worst sorts of people on a regular basis, so I don't have to worry nearly as much that I will have to deal with those types personally.

What I hate are cops who are unprofessional, corrupt, and who otherwise abuse their power.

If cops become more dangerous than the criminals they are intended to protect society from, then society can begin to devolve and quickly.
 
Jerry said:
Cops and military are supposed to give a verbal warning whenever possible. It's part of the escalation-of-force procedure, official doctrin.
Click to expand...

Yes, care to give me even a 2 second timestamp from this video that shows this cop escalated from a lower threat level?

So far as I can see from this video, this guy was ready to shoot, turning 360 before locking onto his intended target. This guy at best was a bully looking for an easy victim that he could abuse to maintain his sense of power.
 
clownboy said:
Agreed. And as I previously said, he probably violated policy. But not illegal and your argument that you somehow magically know why he raised his rifle in the first place is done.
Click to expand...

It doesnt matter why he initially raised the rifle. Lets just assume that the reason for him to raise his rifle was in response to a legitimate threat. That part is fine. Whats not fine is swinging the rifle around to point it at other people who just walked up and posed no threat and then making a threat on their life. That is the problem. If he had just kept the weapon pointing at the person that made the threat (again assuming there was a person who posed a threat to the cop) then I wouldnt have a problem with this.

Honestly I cant believe people are actually trying to defend this guy. It boggles my mind that there are people who think its ok to point a loaded weapon at someone who isnt a threat.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Please, feel free to point out anywhere in my comment you responded to where I "excused" or "justified" the officer's actions. I did say that he should be off duty immediately and in for at least a long break from duty. I also said that considering the past couple of weeks in Ferguson, the officer may be under a lot of stress and that he was clearly at a dangerous point in his mental state. So what part of that excuses or justifies? It tries to provide a rationale but I refused, as was the author of the OP's want, to call the officer a terrorist.

Unlike most people on the left, most of us on the right don't see this as a partisan or ideological issue and are prepared to condemn the actions of the officer here and have said it's wrong, even though we generally support law enforcement and those who do that difficult job.
Click to expand...

From my perspective, the first line unravels the second. Had you not included it, I should have not responded as such.
 
BmanMcfly said:
Furthermore, this does not come from a "hatred" of cops. I like knowing that there are cops around dealing with the worst sorts of people on a regular basis, so I don't have to worry nearly as much that I will have to deal with those types personally.

What I hate are cops who are unprofessional, corrupt, and who otherwise abuse their power.

If cops become more dangerous than the criminals they are intended to protect society from, then society can begin to devolve and quickly.
Click to expand...

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me!
 
BmanMcfly said:
Yes, care to give me even a 2 second timestamp from this video that shows this cop escalated from a lower threat level?
Click to expand...
I would like to but the video has been edited.

BmanMcfly said:
So far as I can see from this video, this guy was ready to shoot, turning 360 before locking onto his intended target. This guy at best was a bully looking for an easy victim that he could abuse to maintain his sense of power.
Click to expand...
That seems to be exactly the way this edited video wants to piant the cop.
 
Omgitsme said:
It doesnt matter why he initially raised the rifle. Lets just assume that the reason for him to raise his rifle was in response to a legitimate threat. That part is fine. Whats not fine is swinging the rifle around to point it at other people who just walked up and posed no threat and then making a threat on their life. That is the problem. If he had just kept the weapon pointing at the person that made the threat (again assuming there was a person who posed a threat to the cop) then I wouldnt have a problem with this.

Honestly I cant believe people are actually trying to defend this guy. It boggles my mind that there are people who think its ok to point a loaded weapon at someone who isnt a threat.
Click to expand...
You don't know they just walked up. There's only one camera so far and that camra is showing us the cop, not the cop's perspective. Ferguson had better hurry up with those uniform cameras.
 
There#s british TV coveragein better quality, of the incident. They too were threatend by the psycho-cop.
 
Jerry said:
I would like to but the video has been edited.


That seems to be exactly the way this edited video wants to piant the cop.
Click to expand...

Seriously, you are grasping.

The cop has been suspended indefinitely, and with good reason, if he was not fired then that would be an even worse sign for how far the country is gone.

I would recommend taking 2 hours and watch all the news reports on the scene and come back and say the same thing... The fact is that cops have really gone overboard this whole time, and this cop took it a step too far.
 
Jerry said:
You don't know they just walked up. There's only one camera so far and that camra is showing us the cop, not the cop's perspective. Ferguson had better hurry up with those uniform cameras.
Click to expand...

Of course they did. The video starts with them some distance away from the cop.
 
BmanMcfly said:
Seriously, you are grasping.
Click to expand...
Nope, just commenting.

BmanMcfly said:
I would recommend taking 2 hours and watch all the news reports on the scene and come back and say the same thing... The fact is that cops have really gone overboard this whole time, and this cop took it a step too far.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the invitation but I don't watch mainstreem news media. The 24hr cycle bores me.
 
Have the guys with the camera and big mouths identified themselves?
They seemed very proud of themselves.
 
Jerry said:
Nope, just commenting.


Thank you for the invitation but I don't watch mainstreem news media. The 24hr cycle bores me.
Click to expand...

No, I meant the raw video...

Seriously, the cops have been more or less leaving the looters alone, while attacking peaceful protestors and the media, almost exclusively.

Yes, arrests have been made, and there have been at least 2 others to commit suicide by cop, but the police have taken a highly provocative stance from the start.
 
BmanMcfly said:
No, I meant the raw video...

Seriously, the cops have been more or less leaving the looters alone, while attacking peaceful protestors and the media, almost exclusively.

Yes, arrests have been made, and there have been at least 2 others to commit suicide by cop, but the police have taken a highly provocative stance from the start.
Click to expand...
I would actualy love to see the raw video. Do you happen to have a link handy?
 
Jerry said:
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.
Click to expand...

It is a subtle style that had me guessing... I will admit that one.
 
calm said:
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
Click to expand...

Aliens
 
Grand Mal said:
One solution is to pay cops more and attract higher-quality people.
Click to expand...

that's not going to happen...

"Back in 1999, a Federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by a police applicant who was barred from the New London, Connecticut police force. The reason for the disqualification was literally because he had scored “too high” on an intelligence test. The department made it clear, they didn’t want the bottom of the barrel in terms of intelligence, but they didn’t want anyone “too smart” either."

Police Officially Refuse To Hire Applicants With High IQ Scores : Political Blind Spot
 
TNAR said:
Perhaps you should do some research into this system before you idolize too much. A large amount of case and statutory law has made it very clear that the police are under no obligation to protect citizens.

Warren v. District of Columbia
DeShaney v. Winnebago County
Castle Rock v. Gonzales
Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department
Et cetera.
Click to expand...

This only proves that you don't actually understand what many of those cases were truly about. They do have a job obligation to help people, help to protect citizens, but that doesn't mean that they have any obligation to help in exactly the way that each and every citizen wants them to. That would be impossible. Also, they cannot be everywhere at once. They also decided that just because it is a government agency's job description to help the citizens in some particular way, it doesn't mean that failure to do prevent crime or abuse or whatever means that they violated someone's rights.

Plus, perhaps you should read what I said. I said "should". For the most part, this is their job despite not being able to protect everyone.

You cannot show that what you want is likely to be a better system for everyone, particularly the poorest people. Police action would be based on ability to pay for it, which is a horrible system of justice. We would have so many cases of people getting framed or paid off or setup. And forget people's rights. They wouldn't care.
 
roguenuke said:
You cannot show that what you want is likely to be a better system for everyone, particularly the poorest people. Police action would be based on ability to pay for it, which is a horrible system of justice.
Click to expand...

You apparently have no clue how the U.S. justice system works. As the saying goes, the U.S. has the best justice system money can buy. Do you suppose they say this because it is "fair" to the "poorest people" as you put it? Of course not.

Detroit is one of the poorest and most violence cities in America. Yet, they have two of the most cost-effective private "police" forces in the nation. Threat Management Center and Detroit 300.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom