• 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!

Is it fair to say the mayor where the 2 cops were killed was partly responsible?

was it correct to say the mayor had blood on his hands

  • Total voters
    43
plutonium

plutonium

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 16, 2013
Messages
1,109
Reaction score
302
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I think the New York police union said the mayor had blood on his hands for the 2 police getting killed....does that also mean if republicans call Obama a dictator or a hitler and he gets assassinated they will have blood on their hands...if it provokes someone to kill the prez
 
Mayor de Blasio expressed sympathy for Black New Yorkers who are sick of racial profiling and its, sometimes fatal, consequences. He did this while also calling for peaceful protest and making it clear that he did not think all police officers were a problem. To argue that such measured behavior inspired someone to kill two people is absurd. It is a leap of logic so wide that it could only be made by those determined to arrive at that conclusion. So no, the Mayor is not responsible.

I also want to note that my hypothesis is that most of the people who are trying to blame de Blasio and others for this murder are people who were already opposed to the anti-police-brutality demonstrations taking place nationwide. I suspect that they are using these deaths to promote a position they already held and shame/scare people into stopping the protests and other forms of criticism. If I am correct, then their behavior is even more absurd and shameful than it is on the surface.
 
No. Of course not. Its ****ing stupid.
 
Theres a whole lot of people with blood on their hands. Rather than first using reason and wisdom also MLK, they took to the streets playing simple minded rabble rousing. never mind the fact that Ferguson Missouri burned down over a lie and that none of the race baiters and charlatans that were spewing hatred even bothered to study and learn the truth (and God forbid...acknowledge the truth). No...its far better to stir up hatred and rage. And sunovabitch...some ****head with half a brain listened to them and then went and killed 3 people and a subhuman piece of **** (adding into the mix his suicide). Who could have possibly seen that coming? Shocking...right?

Interesting that the people that consistently vented their hatred and rage towards cops in general (and dont lie...you saw PLENTY of it right here on this site) and that went out of their way to find examples of the extreme minority of the law enforcement community would be the first ones absolutely ****ting themselves if people applied that broad brush of bigotry and hatred towards a specific race because of the actions of a minority.

A whole lot of people.

Sad thing is...its not done.
 
plutonium said:
I think the New York police union said the mayor had blood on his hands for the 2 police getting killed....does that also mean if republicans call Obama a dictator or a hitler and he gets assassinated they will have blood on their hands...if it provokes someone to kill the prez
Click to expand...

Prior to the mayoralty of Rudy Giuliani, New York had a major crime problem. Giuliani instituted a police policy were the police had a zero tolerance policy for even the smallest infractions. Soon, crime abated and New York became a comparatively safe city. Di Blazio is no Giuliani. His commissioner is tolerant of minor infractions and Di Blazio is conciliatory towards the protestors that disrupted the city. He earned the disrespect of the cities police force and his tolerance of the protest some believe encouraged future violence against police in New York. I don't know if Di Blazio has blood on his hands but I believe he's a bad person.
 
I didn't vote. The poll makes no sense.

The title "was it correct to say the mayor had blood on his hands" ask one questions , then in the post it goes on to ask "does that also mean if republicans call Obama a dictator or a hitler and he gets assassinated they will have blood on their hands...if it provokes someone to kill the prez"

So if you vote yes, the poster is saying the mayor is partly to blame in the killings and you also agree that the Republician's would share in the blame under the situation regarding the President.

Seems this is a bait and switch poll with no real attempt to discuss the NYPD killings but some off tangent discussion about Republican's.
 
What could DiBlasio have done differently to prevent this? You think the probably-mentally-ill shooter would not have been inclined to shoot two cops if DiBlasio had said the cops in the Garner incident were in the right?
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Mayor de Blasio expressed sympathy for Black New Yorkers who are sick of racial profiling and its, sometimes fatal, consequences. He did this while also calling for peaceful protest and making it clear that he did not think all police officers were a problem. To argue that such measured behavior inspired someone to kill two people is absurd. It is a leap of logic so wide that it could only be made by those determined to arrive at that conclusion. So no, the Mayor is not responsible.

I also want to note that my hypothesis is that most of the people who are trying to blame de Blasio and others for this murder are people who were already opposed to the anti-police-brutality demonstrations taking place nationwide. I suspect that they are using these deaths to promote a position they already held and shame/scare people into stopping the protests and other forms of criticism. If I am correct, then their behavior is even more absurd and shameful than it is on the surface.
Click to expand...

In the context established by de Blasio's anti-police campaign for office, his remarks were understood by many as a broad questioning of police legitimacy. In the environment of fragile social peace in NYC in recent weeks, that made a violent incident more likely. Your second paragraph is just a broad smear that does not merit a response.
 
Kobie said:
What could DiBlasio have done differently to prevent this? You think the probably-mentally-ill shooter would not have been inclined to shoot two cops if DiBlasio had said the cops in the Garner incident were in the right?
Click to expand...

De Blasio, in my view, came out and spoke as a person who supported the Garner family after the GJ verdict, not as the Mayor of a major American city with a high population of minorities and a history of tension between police and those minorities.

When De Blasio spoke, why was he surrounded only by black people, none of them police officers? Why did he not say anything about the good work that police do for the city? Why didn't he speak about respect for the GJ process and the GJ decision?

He spoke only of the pain felt by the father and family of Eric Garner, whom he called a "good man". Did he know anything about Eric Garner and his criminal record?

Did De Blasio take responsibility for his role in the crackdown on illegal cigarette sales in NYC? Did he say that he and his city council were wrong to push police to exert what seems like zero tolerance in that regard?

De Blasio could have done a lot for his city to help it get past this event but he chose to exploit it on an irrational and emotional level and he wasn't man enough to take some of the blame.

He deserves all the backlash he's getting and going to get for his role in this sad situation.
 
CanadaJohn said:
De Blasio, in my view, came out and spoke as a person who supported the Garner family after the GJ verdict, not as the Mayor of a major American city with a high population of minorities and a history of tension between police and those minorities.

When De Blasio spoke, why was he surrounded only by black people, none of them police officers? Why did he not say anything about the good work that police do for the city? Why didn't he speak about respect for the GJ process and the GJ decision?

He spoke only of the pain felt by the father and family of Eric Garner, whom he called a "good man". Did he know anything about Eric Garner and his criminal record?

Did De Blasio take responsibility for his role in the crackdown on illegal cigarette sales in NYC? Did he say that he and his city council were wrong to push police to exert what seems like zero tolerance in that regard?

De Blasio could have done a lot for his city to help it get past this event but he chose to exploit it on an irrational and emotional level and he wasn't man enough to take some of the blame.

He deserves all the backlash he's getting and going to get for his role in this sad situation.
Click to expand...

^ Does anyone believe any of that really had anything to do with this whacko shooting two cops? He shot his girlfriend before the incident.
 
Kobie said:
^ Does anyone believe any of that really had anything to do with this whacko shooting two cops? He shot his girlfriend before the incident.
Click to expand...

Yes. It did. Social peace breaks at a weak point.
 
Jack Hays said:
Yes. It did.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight.

You think this joker shot his girlfriend in Baltimore, then drove to New York City and shot two cops, because Bill De Blasio was overly sympathetic to Eric Garner's family.

That is ridiculous.
 
Kobie said:
So let me get this straight.

You think this joker shot his girlfriend in Baltimore, then drove to New York City and shot two cops, because Bill De Blasio was overly sympathetic to Eric Garner's family.

That is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

He shot the girlfriend, then decided to go to NYC and shoot cops. Check out his Facebook and Twitter items.
 
Jack Hays said:
He shot the girlfriend, then decided to go to NYC and shoot cops. Check out his Facebook and Twitter items.
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand that, and the guy is quite clearly mental. But if De Blasio had been more supportive of the cops, you honestly think this guy would have been like "yeah, I guess I won't shoot any cops today"?
 
Kobie said:
Yes, I understand that, and the guy is quite clearly mental. But if De Blasio had been more supportive of the cops, you honestly think this guy would have been like "yeah, I guess I won't shoot any cops today"?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the shooter was so far off center mentally. And yes, de Blasio helped diminish police legitimacy and made it more likely someone would take a shot. It just happened to be this guy.
 
Kobie said:
^ Does anyone believe any of that really had anything to do with this whacko shooting two cops? He shot his girlfriend before the incident.
Click to expand...

Not being mentally ill nor a practitioner in the health and care of the mentally ill, I have no idea what the man was thinking at the time. One can only go by his own words and the context in which the crime was committed.

Let me ask you - why do you think he drove from Baltimore to NYC to kill cops? Are there no cops in Baltimore? What would be the purpose for singling out NYC cops if not because of the Garner case and the political reaction surrounding it?
 
sawdust said:
Prior to the mayoralty of Rudy Giuliani, New York had a major crime problem. Giuliani instituted a police policy were the police had a zero tolerance policy for even the smallest infractions. Soon, crime abated and New York became a comparatively safe city. Di Blazio is no Giuliani. His commissioner is tolerant of minor infractions and Di Blazio is conciliatory towards the protestors that disrupted the city. He earned the disrespect of the cities police force and his tolerance of the protest some believe encouraged future violence against police in New York. I don't know if Di Blazio has blood on his hands but I believe he's a bad person.
Click to expand...

There's the problem right there. The police learned to use overwhelming force for even the smallest infractions, and used it in this case.
 
Being a cop is risking your life every minute. That said, that's a cops career choice. They went in knowing that. Honestly it isn't the mayors fault but I still voted yes because I don't like the guy. That said, cops get shot all the time with or without protests or national controversy.
 
The police, and 100 years of terror are responsible for the killing of 2 pigs.

Besides the killing of so many people in the last few years that they have been COVERING UP.


WSJ story.
"WASHINGTON—When 24-year-old Albert Jermaine Payton wielded a knife in front of the police in this city’s southeast corner, officers opened fire and killed him.

Yet according to national statistics intended to track police killings, Mr. Payton’s death in August 2012 never happened. It is one of hundreds of homicides by law-enforcement agencies between 2007 and 2012 that aren’t included in records kept by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

A Wall Street Journal analysis of the latest data from 105 of the country’s largest police agencies found more than 550 police killings during those years were missing from the national tally or, in a few dozen cases, not attributed to the agency involved. The result: It is nearly impossible to determine how many people are killed by the police each year.

Hundreds of Police Killings Are Uncounted in Federal Statistics - WSJ
 
Cops are not "pigs." Liberals are not responsible for this shooting. Neither is the mayor. So much lunacy going around. :shakes head disgustedly:
 
The only person responsible for the tragic deaths of those officers was the man that killed them, Ismaaiyl Brinsley. It is not the fault of the protesters, it is not the fault of the media, it is not the fault of the mayor. Ismaaiyl Brinsley made a decision to attack those police officers. It is sad, but nobody has blood on there hands except for him. There are policemen in this world who abuse their power, hence the protests. But even the most devout of protesters would not advocate for the killing of police officers who have done nothing but serve their city. Even with all the negative attention toward our officers, it was never about getting back at police officers. It was about bringing those who abuse their power to justice. Mayor de Blasio does not own fault in this either. The only peorson who deserves the blame is that bas**** in a body bag who decided to target innocent public servants.
 
No, though I don't have a problem pointing a finger at Sharpston.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom