• 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!

Cops beating people

RedAkston said:
I was responding to a poster who said this:



Context is important, the only "mixup" seems to be on your part in not following the timeline that led to my post.

As for the rest of your post, how many hypothetical questions can you and your ilk put out there where what you claim to be happening isn't really happening on the scale you portray it to be happening on?

I'm all about punishing dirty cops. The video above, even when show in it's entirety (not the edited version that was originally submitted) shows a cop using excessive force. The cop should be punished IMO. But as is the case with so many of these incidents, videos are edited or additional videos from a different angle, show a completely different picture than what what we were led to believe. Most cops are good people and good cops. But just as with any large section of individuals, there are going to be a few bad apples. Doesn't matter if they're cops, politicians, judges, doctors, lawyers or sanitation workers. I understand that cops have quite a bit of authority and that the dirty cops should be dealt with in the judicial system.
Click to expand...

If that's how you wanna spin it in your mind, last I checked "I haven't seen a cop beat anyone on tv" is a separate clause from "and I watch tv nearly every day". You're stating that you have never seen a cop beat anyone on tv. At any time. Period. And then add the second clause stating that you would know because you watch tv nearly every day. Now if you had wanted to counter that persons statement with the sentiment you claim you did, it would look more like. "I haven't seen the cops beating people on tv everyday and I watch tv nearly everyday". Notice I used the cops, instead of "a cop." Also notice instead of anyone, I use the plural "people". This makes the sentence more in line with what you're stating you intended. Regardless of the post you're responding to, and what context you feel is there that should be picked up on.

I claimed the OP as a hypothetical situation, because he offered no video, news reports, or anything of substance as to the event actually happening. Which makes you and your ilk (see how I did to you what you did to me there) fall into an echo chamber of "fake news, didn't happen, so forth and so on".

I didn't show you the video for any other reason than you stated you had never seen one on tv, I chose that one because it was shown on tv. I have no idea why they edited it. That's on the news station. If you had followed the progression of your posts in context, you would have known why I responded with that and in that way.

And then I asked how many videos would you need to see for it to become a concern. Not how hypotheticals, but how many videos. You're mis-characterization of my question is telling, as is your spin when caught in a statement you later indicated was a lie with. "I saw this video earlier." Which doesn't jive with "I haven't seen a cop beat anyone on tv" Now instead of calling you a liar, I asked if you had a wording mix-up. You shouldn't have doubled down in my opinion. Now you have even less credibility in my eyes.

I'm glad you're all for punishing dirty cops. This isn't about dirty cops. It's about the police, all police's attitude that "If you don't respect my authority, I won't respect you as a person." regardless of whether a crime is committed or not. You may be fine with that attitude in the police, but many, many people are not. And my and my ilk have just as much right to an opinion on how the police conduct themselves as you do.

Btw, I asked the question how many videos it would take, because there are a lot of videos concerning the police. Almost none of them make it to the news. And there are a lot of videos showing the police doing everything right. But not as many, or close to as many...

Which is telling in this day and age, when everything the police do is caught on camera and uploaded to youtube. You can surf around youtube and look for yourself, or continue believing there isn't a problem because it's not showing up on tv. "Ignorance is bliss" as they say.
 
ThoughtEx. said:
If that's how you wanna spin it in your mind, last I checked "I haven't seen a cop beat anyone on tv" is a separate clause from "and I watch tv nearly every day". You're stating that you have never seen a cop beat anyone on tv. At any time. Period. And then add the second clause stating that you would know because you watch tv nearly every day. Now if you had wanted to counter that persons statement with the sentiment you claim you did, it would look more like. "I haven't seen the cops beating people on tv everyday and I watch tv nearly everyday". Notice I used the cops, instead of "a cop." Also notice instead of anyone, I use the plural "people". This makes the sentence more in line with what you're stating you intended. Regardless of the post you're responding to, and what context you feel is there that should be picked up on.

I claimed the OP as a hypothetical situation, because he offered no video, news reports, or anything of substance as to the event actually happening. Which makes you and your ilk (see how I did to you what you did to me there) fall into an echo chamber of "fake news, didn't happen, so forth and so on".

I didn't show you the video for any other reason than you stated you had never seen one on tv, I chose that one because it was shown on tv. I have no idea why they edited it. That's on the news station. If you had followed the progression of your posts in context, you would have known why I responded with that and in that way.

And then I asked how many videos would you need to see for it to become a concern. Not how hypotheticals, but how many videos. You're mis-characterization of my question is telling, as is your spin when caught in a statement you later indicated was a lie with. "I saw this video earlier." Which doesn't jive with "I haven't seen a cop beat anyone on tv" Now instead of calling you a liar, I asked if you had a wording mix-up. You shouldn't have doubled down in my opinion. Now you have even less credibility in my eyes.

I'm glad you're all for punishing dirty cops. This isn't about dirty cops. It's about the police, all police's attitude that "If you don't respect my authority, I won't respect you as a person." regardless of whether a crime is committed or not. You may be fine with that attitude in the police, but many, many people are not. And my and my ilk have just as much right to an opinion on how the police conduct themselves as you do.

Btw, I asked the question how many videos it would take, because there are a lot of videos concerning the police. Almost none of them make it to the news. And there are a lot of videos showing the police doing everything right. But not as many, or close to as many...

Which is telling in this day and age, when everything the police do is caught on camera and uploaded to youtube. You can surf around youtube and look for yourself, or continue believing there isn't a problem because it's not showing up on tv. "Ignorance is bliss" as they say.
Click to expand...

Yawn... I just lost an IQ point or two reading that drivel that you just spilled out all over your keyboard. It's OK, I have plenty to lose. Does your head ever hurt from all that spinning you seem to do so often? I get it, cops are bad mmmkay...lol
 
ThoughtEx. said:
If that's how you wanna spin it in your mind, last I checked "I haven't seen a cop beat anyone on tv" is a separate clause from "and I watch tv nearly every day". You're stating that you have never seen a cop beat anyone on tv. At any time. Period. And then add the second clause stating that you would know because you watch tv nearly every day. Now if you had wanted to counter that persons statement with the sentiment you claim you did, it would look more like. "I haven't seen the cops beating people on tv everyday and I watch tv nearly everyday". Notice I used the cops, instead of "a cop." Also notice instead of anyone, I use the plural "people". This makes the sentence more in line with what you're stating you intended. Regardless of the post you're responding to, and what context you feel is there that should be picked up on.

I claimed the OP as a hypothetical situation, because he offered no video, news reports, or anything of substance as to the event actually happening. Which makes you and your ilk (see how I did to you what you did to me there) fall into an echo chamber of "fake news, didn't happen, so forth and so on".

I didn't show you the video for any other reason than you stated you had never seen one on tv, I chose that one because it was shown on tv. I have no idea why they edited it. That's on the news station. If you had followed the progression of your posts in context, you would have known why I responded with that and in that way.

And then I asked how many videos would you need to see for it to become a concern. Not how hypotheticals, but how many videos. You're mis-characterization of my question is telling, as is your spin when caught in a statement you later indicated was a lie with. "I saw this video earlier." Which doesn't jive with "I haven't seen a cop beat anyone on tv" Now instead of calling you a liar, I asked if you had a wording mix-up. You shouldn't have doubled down in my opinion. Now you have even less credibility in my eyes.

I'm glad you're all for punishing dirty cops. This isn't about dirty cops. It's about the police, all police's attitude that "If you don't respect my authority, I won't respect you as a person." regardless of whether a crime is committed or not. You may be fine with that attitude in the police, but many, many people are not. And my and my ilk have just as much right to an opinion on how the police conduct themselves as you do.

Btw, I asked the question how many videos it would take, because there are a lot of videos concerning the police. Almost none of them make it to the news. And there are a lot of videos showing the police doing everything right. But not as many, or close to as many...

Which is telling in this day and age, when everything the police do is caught on camera and uploaded to youtube. You can surf around youtube and look for yourself, or continue believing there isn't a problem because it's not showing up on tv. "Ignorance is bliss" as they say.
Click to expand...
So good.

I find people have the most trouble with facts that is a techtonic shift with your values as a person.

That's why I say the law must be changed so they go to jail for this.

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
 
Dirt Sands said:
So good.

I find people have the most trouble with facts that is a techtonic shift with your values as a person.

That's why I say the law must be changed so they go to jail for this.

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Tectonic... just an FYI,.
 
ThoughtEx. said:
I have no idea why the news report cut out the part with him putting his hands behind his back to avoid the officers grabbing at him. Nothing his hands did gave indication that he was about to attack them however, so the level of beatdown he got was completely unwarranted. Especially, since he did have permission to be there. They should have tased him, slapped the cuffs on him, and investigated who he was, and why he was there. Realized they had the wrong guy, and let him go.
Click to expand...
So they should have tased him you say. Because he was obviously aggressively resisting arrest. And if they had tased him, you and others would be posting "OHMIGAWD THE EEEEEEVIL COPS TASED HIM FOR NO GOOD REASON!!!"

And why would you make that obviously bull**** statement "I have no idea why the news report cut out the part with him putting his hands behind his back to avoid the officers grabbing at him." Of course you know why they edited the video. The unedited version shows him aggressively confronting law enforcement and resisting arrest. And hell...THAT would just the cops at LEAST tasing him...if not giving him a pop or two.
 
VanceMack said:
So they should have tased him you say. Because he was obviously aggressively resisting arrest. And if they had tased him, you and others would be posting "OHMIGAWD THE EEEEEEVIL COPS TASED HIM FOR NO GOOD REASON!!!"

And why would you make that obviously bull**** statement "I have no idea why the news report cut out the part with him putting his hands behind his back to avoid the officers grabbing at him." Of course you know why they edited the video. The unedited version shows him aggressively confronting law enforcement and resisting arrest. And hell...THAT would just the cops at LEAST tasing him...if not giving him a pop or two.
Click to expand...

you got a crow problem? why you building all these straw men? Get back to me if ever have a response to the words I actually posted.
 
Dirt Sands said:
They can attack you because they're under stress?

I'm going to love this Law and Order forum. Looks like I found the swamp that needs to be drained.

I look forward to exposing those who don't give a crud about law, order, or humanity

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Don't jump to any conclusions. You don't even have a case with this one.
 
Dirt Sands said:
Two days before Harvey, while walking from the transit train to the 7/11 across the street in Miami, I witnessed a police officer with his baton held high over his head in a striking position, threaten an old homeless man. The cop wanted him to leave and the old man was yelling. I thought how can this be legal? I was so offended!

Should laws be changed to more easily prosecute cops for beating people?

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


it is my opinion that the greater majority of citizens don't care about the truth of police brutality. It seems that most citizens see police brutality as an 'acceptable' fact of our modern way of life. LE gets away with many things & never has to pay a price for it; murder being the worst but again, this is the reality of America.

I say just let it roll off your back like water off a duck ...........
 
Dirt Sands said:
No he didn't strike him. Was very threatening. It begs the question:

Should the law be changed so that police don't beat you for any reason?


Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


No need to change anything. If the police beat you for no reason there is a law against that currently on the books today.
The guy was not beaten by your own omission. You do realize that police interact with people who may not want to comply
with them. Right?


And then there is this...... Police getting homeless off the streets so they will be safe during the hurricane!

Miami homeless being removed against their will ahead of Hurricane Irma
“I am not going to sign suicide notes for people who are homeless in my community,” said chairman of the Miami-Dade Homeless Trust

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/09/08/miami-homeless-being-removed-against-their-will-ahead-of-hurricane-irma/

“We’re going out and every single homeless person who is unwilling to come off the street, we are likely going to involuntarily Baker Act them,” said Ron Book, chairman of the Miami-Dade Homeless Trust.

Invoking the “Baker Act” — a law that enables authorities to institutionalize patients who present a danger to themselves or others — is not something law enforcement does lightly, but officers detained at least six people by Friday afternoon. Under the law, they can be held up to 72 hours before the state would have to go to court to prolong their detention.
 
Dirt Sands said:
What if it were you? You see cops on the news every f**"in day beating people. What he did before I arrived was he was homeless and old. What if that were your grand- father? You think that's funny? Sorry we're not Nazi Germany. You think they should be able to beat people Carte Blanch?

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If it was my grandfather, I would stop and analyze the situation.
 
Here is a video of how a 15 year old girl attacked a police officer, a crime for which she was arrested and charged (together with resisting arrest)

 
Peter King said:
Here is a video of how a 15 year old girl attacked a police officer, a crime for which she was arrested and charged (together with resisting arrest)

Click to expand...


She was obviously upset about something and she then tried to leave on her bike. To say the officer attacked her is dishonest.
 
Dirt Sands said:
Two days before Harvey, while walking from the transit train to the 7/11 across the street in Miami, I witnessed a police officer with his baton held high over his head in a striking position, threaten an old homeless man. The cop wanted him to leave and the old man was yelling. I thought how can this be legal? I was so offended!

Should laws be changed to more easily prosecute cops for beating people?

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Was the raised baton actually used to strike the "Homeless" man?
 
Maccabee said:
She was obviously upset about something and she then tried to leave on her bike. To say the officer attacked her is dishonest.
Click to expand...

Except that was not the reason why the police officer said they needed to use that incredibly ridiculous amount of violence on a 15 year old kid, it was because "the girl attacked the officer" and if you can find where the girl attacked the officer then please entertain us with your "wisdom".
 
Peter King said:
Except that was not the reason why the police officer said they needed to use that incredibly ridiculous amount of violence on a 15 year old kid, it was because "the girl attacked the officer" and if you can find where the girl attacked the officer then please entertain us with your "wisdom".
Click to expand...

First off, is that what the police said or is that what the video said? Secondly, assuming that the title is true, they both went off screen so we don't know exactly what happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom