Caught on camera, police explode in rage and violence across the US

[Threegoofs]

Prove it then. Link to the real picture, please.

You’ll just repeat your false claim.

Do your own scutwork. You claimed it’s fake, so back it up.

 

[jonny5]

You need to change your claim of being a libertarian to something else because you obviously aren't one. Or, are you the typical "libertarian" that is only a libertarian when it comes to white people?

Ad hominem.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Ad hominem.

You are claiming to be a libertarian, yet you take the government's side when a government employee murder's an unarmed man, in broad daylight, in front of everyone.

 

[ashurbanipal]

Did you want to see armed WHITE GUYS out protesting the police?

In my case: HELL YES.

 

[bubbabgone]

There is a bit of a difference. In Hitler's case, he at least had actually read the Bible and was not holding it upside down.

The Hitler pic was also photoshopped.
Some advice from me to you because while I don't usually agree with you, you haven't shown yourself to be dishonest ... you can't trust what some people post here.
2 similarly dishonest posts in one thread is an example.

 

[bubbabgone]

Prove it then. Link to the real picture, please.

Did you see the 2nd photoshopped picture?
The one with Hitler and Trump?
Think it's some kind of psychosis?

 

[Threegoofs]

Did you see the 2nd photoshopped picture?
The one with Hitler and Trump?
Think it's some kind of psychosis?

Which part was photoshopped?

Then again, given your photoshop skills, you probably think the photo was supposed to be of Trump and Hitler next to each other, holding bibles.


But, you may be right. Even Hitler wouldn’t stoop so low as to use the Bible as a prop.

 

[Threegoofs]

Did you see the 2nd photoshopped picture?
The one with Hitler and Trump?
Think it's some kind of psychosis?

You’re real good at this, so I’ll ask you...

Is this one photoshopped?

I’m not positive, but I’m suspicious. I mean, first of all it’s spelled correctly.

 

[rjay]

What an awful job. Why would anybody want that job?? Being a police officer has got to be a lousy job. Anyway, as a recap, a black man is murdered by a white officer. The white officer is arrested and charged with murder. Protest continues. Why?? Not sure. Riots ensue. Why?? Not sure. And now it was because of white cops?? Really?? Hmmm. Makes me wonder if somebody in Beijing or Moscow is responsible for the information feed. What's next?? I know, We'll start getting transcripts of hacked e-mails of white police officers planning the ruin of inner city communities. Sure. That's next!!

Interesting that you mentioned Beijing. I have been watching clips coming out of the U.S. Cops shooting 'rubber' bullets at people standing in their doorways. Police inciting violence, changing peaceful protests into a melee. It reminds me of the Chinese Government and Tiananmen Square.

The police seem to be going out just hoping to get some action. It is like they can't wait to mix it up with some protestors. Each morning I wake up wondering if the police have started firing into the crowd yet.

I feel like I am witnessing the end of America as a western democracy. The worst part is, it seems like many Americans can't wait to become a police state.

 

[Logophile]

Interesting that you mentioned Beijing. I have been watching clips coming out of the U.S. Cops shooting 'rubber' bullets at people standing in their doorways. Police inciting violence, changing peaceful protests into a melee. It reminds me of the Chinese Government and Tiananmen Square.

The police seem to be going out just hoping to get some action. It is like they can't wait to mix it up with some protestors. Each morning I wake up wondering if the police have started firing into the crowd yet.

I feel like I am witnessing the end of America as a western democracy. The worst part is, it seems like many Americans can't wait to become a police state.

I think the sad truth is that the problem is sociological in nature. We have a population that has been forced into isolation, that has benefited from an economy that has now turned on its heel and is threatening their livelihoods and security. Another issue is that people are just plain bored. They aren't struggling for survival as their basic natures are still programmed to do, and that leaves them adrift, jabbing at each other through social media or focusing on "other people's lives." Entertainment has become more and more sorted and geared toward shock value, in an attempt to elicit a strong reaction from a population that is already pushing the envelope on every level to test conventional manners and mores. It's a frightening time,to be sure. Regarding Beijing, I think there are big differences between Tienanmen and our current domestic problem, and I don't see police response the same light as you do, but we can respectfully disagree. Thanks!!

 

[Manc Skipper]

Interesting that you mentioned Beijing. I have been watching clips coming out of the U.S. Cops shooting 'rubber' bullets at people standing in their doorways. Police inciting violence, changing peaceful protests into a melee. It reminds me of the Chinese Government and Tiananmen Square.

The police seem to be going out just hoping to get some action. It is like they can't wait to mix it up with some protestors. Each morning I wake up wondering if the police have started firing into the crowd yet.

I feel like I am witnessing the end of America as a western democracy. The worst part is, it seems like many Americans can't wait to become a police state.

Trump commented at the time that the Chinese government almost let the students get away with their protest but they eventually clamped down good and hard to win the day...

 

[PoS]

You’ll just repeat your false claim.

Do your own scutwork. You claimed it’s fake, so back it up.

Ha, I knew it. You refuse to provide any links, so its obviously fake, just like all your posts.

 

[code1211]

Blacks are 12% of the population. Whites are 61% of the population. If you are math-challenged, then that simply means that unarmed black people are killed by the police at disproportionate rates compared to white people.

Just the same, in case this hasn't occurred to you, if you fix police brutality for black people, you will also do so for white people.

Don't you just hate it when a poster edits your words for no other reason than to change the meaning and them presents them as it they have been changed?

 

[code1211]

That is true.

And so it is also true that the list of citizens of all colors killed by police, maimed by police, and subsequently covered up by the police, is very long indeed. Many young, many old. Many at the altar of the drug war, and many at various other altars.

A few of the offending personnel were prosecuted and convicted, but many more were acquitted by complicit jurors. The system protects itself.

And the important part is that this has been going on really for generations, and nothing changes. Lip service does not change things.

And so the frustration has built for generations. George Moody was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.

I assume you meant George Floyd?

I agree that police have the potential and the record to justify suspicion.

This has been amply demonstrated at the "street level" numerous times and at the highest levels of society and government by the outrageous attacks on the President and his appointees.

In the case of the street level, the media makes things worse by presenting only half of the story.

In the case of the highest levels, the media makes things worse by presenting only half of the story.

It seems pretty obvious that the goal of the media is to make things worse. It would be nice if everyone understood that what they see on TV or on the internet is usually only half true if that.

Most people understand that stuff on the internet is suspect. For some reason, they don't understand that the Evening news is only just as reliable.

 

[code1211]

No, I am acting like a teacher to the 3rd grader, trying to explain that 2 + 2 doesn’t equal red. I’m sorry that you don’t see it, but that’s on you. Not me.

Third Grade Teachers might shudder at you barging into their level of capability, but I always like to see a person with a high self esteem, even if not justified.

 

[code1211]

And others. People often forget that the United States is a very young country, and democracy as we have it - especially in a melting pot like ours - is only in it's infancy. The long history of the human race is ripe with mob violence, and the victims can be women, babies, heads of state, opposing cultures, religious figures, political dissidents, in short, the gamut. The 1994 Rwandan massacre of 800,000 men, women and children is an extreme example of how the mob mentality can turn into a mob psychosis. And that could happen here. 1994 is not that long ago, so we really have to watch ourselves methinks in terms of how we address each other and how we perceive each other. At least from what I've seen, you do a pretty good job of level headed discourse so thanks!!

History present various warnings and cautions for us.

Recently, the propagandists of the Left have taken to dating the inception of the USA to the date of the first arrival of slaves on the continent: About 400 years ago.

They hope to justify their outrage, used as a means to an end, by eliminating any reference(s) to anything comprising the USA EXCEPT the abuse of humans by enslaving them.

Coincidentally, the Roman Republic was effectively converted to Imperial Rome after about 400 years. That conversion in the USA today is, obviously, the aim of the Leftists today.

The useful idiots they exhort to dismantle the Republic are mob mentality idiots who have life planning and ambition that extends to about the end of the current bar hop.

The old saying has been proven true time after time: You get the government you deserve.

 

[TomFitz]

What an awful job. Why would anybody want that job?? Being a police officer has got to be a lousy job. Anyway, as a recap, a black man is murdered by a white officer. The white officer is arrested and charged with murder. Protest continues. Why?? Not sure. Riots ensue. Why?? Not sure. And now it was because of white cops?? Really?? Hmmm. Makes me wonder if somebody in Beijing or Moscow is responsible for the information feed. What's next?? I know, We'll start getting transcripts of hacked e-mails of white police officers planning the ruin of inner city communities. Sure. That's next!!

Not sure why?

Let me remind you.

8 Minutes and 46 Seconds: How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody - The New York Times


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...=Ttm_UOojaLU&usg=AOvVaw18QyyDgy15GAkzq7vItUh0

And before you try and pretend that these are isolated incidents, here’s this:

Police killed more than 100 unarmed black people in 2015 — Mapping Police Violence

 

[Logophile]

I assume you meant George Floyd?

I agree that police have the potential and the record to justify suspicion.

This has been amply demonstrated at the "street level" numerous times and at the highest levels of society and government by the outrageous attacks on the President and his appointees.

In the case of the street level, the media makes things worse by presenting only half of the story.

In the case of the highest levels, the media makes things worse by presenting only half of the story.

It seems pretty obvious that the goal of the media is to make things worse. It would be nice if everyone understood that what they see on TV or on the internet is usually only half true if that.

Most people understand that stuff on the internet is suspect. For some reason, they don't understand that the Evening news is only just as reliable.

Have to agree with most of your post, although I think media outlets are driven more by competition and bias than "making the situation worse." Certainly that is the outcome of inflammatory and biased reporting. I remember when PBS offered reliable reporting. Now, it seems that even what used to be our most level news sources have descended into biased "news." When I compare the Newshours's Woodruff - for example - to the former anchors, I shake my head. She's terribly transparent and her dislike of Trump is palpable. David Brooks - who used to be a respectable commentator as was his cohort, Shields - have both descended into name calling and bitter analysis that's more akin to hell, fire and brimstone than policy opinions. I really miss the old days when the measure of a journalist was his or her integrity and his or her ability to report as objectively as humanly possible. Oh well. I get most of my news from English sources like Reuters. Not perfect but drier and more succinct. Thanks!!

 

[ttwtt78640]

Read more here: Caught on camera, police explode in rage and violence across the US - The Verge

The lawlessness didn't start with the protestors, it started with the police in major cities across the country killing unarmed Americans. They have been doing it for decades. The difference today is that its often on video. Now, we see police brutality on display across the country.

Now, I not saying that most police act this way. Most police are good people trying to do a hard job. The problem is they seldom will give up the bad ones.

All these armed to the teeth right-wing white guys that protested stay at home orders? Where are they now? Obviously, they don't give a **** about government oppression. Their bull**** is exposed now.

I am ignoring your last paragraph, since the "stay at home orders" (making law by executive fiat?) are not related to police misconduct in any way.

That (bolded above) is a major systemic problem which should (must?) be addressed. The first need for solving any problem is to clearly defne it, thus we first need to define (identify?) who, exactly, you mean by "they". It seems to me that "they" are the public employee unions who demanded (and thus have been given) near total control over who gets fired (for cause?) and/or the state's prosecutors (since only they can initiate criminal charges) who allow the police to use "internal investigations" to "handle" such matters - so unless those "internal investigators" decide to recommend charges (make an arrest) the prosecutors are quite content to ignore such (potentially criminal?) matters ensuring that a jury of one's peers (or even a judge) never has an opportunity to determine guilt (render a verdict?).

The excuse (sometimes called a reason) most often given by prosecutors is that there was not clear evidence of guilt (beyond a reasonable doubt) so the matter was never referred to a grand jury (GJ) to take a look at what evidence was available. That excuse seems weak since it is often asserted that a GJ 'would indict a ham sandwich' since only the state's evidence is presented to the GJ for their consideration (evaluation?). So long as the judical system is left out of the loop, the entire matter of police misconduct (criminal action?) reamins completely under the control of the executive branch of government.

 

[jonny5]

You are claiming to be a libertarian, yet you take the government's side when a government employee murder's an unarmed man, in broad daylight, in front of everyone.

Ad hominem again.
'an argument or reaction directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining'...In case youre not aware of what that is. Just to make it easier for you to stick to the topic, Ill restate my position.

lawlessness doesnt start with police. Police are a response to lawlessness among the citizens. Thus a real solution to police abuse of power is to reduce the need to give police power, by getting rid of theft and assault.

 

[gdgyva]

Have to agree with most of your post, although I think media outlets are driven more by competition and bias than "making the situation worse." Certainly that is the outcome of inflammatory and biased reporting. I remember when PBS offered reliable reporting. Now, it seems that even what used to be our most level news sources have descended into biased "news." When I compare the Newshours's Woodruff - for example - to the former anchors, I shake my head. She's terribly transparent and her dislike of Trump is palpable. David Brooks - who used to be a respectable commentator as was his cohort, Shields - have both descended into name calling and bitter analysis that's more akin to hell, fire and brimstone than policy opinions. I really miss the old days when the measure of a journalist was his or her integrity and his or her ability to report as objectively as humanly possible. Oh well. I get most of my news from English sources like Reuters. Not perfect but drier and more succinct. Thanks!!

well said :applaud

how i harken for the days of Cronkite, and Brinkley and the such

Newsmen who would report the news....and only the news....and NOT TELL you what you should think about it

There was a small segment at the end of the news hour set aside for an op-ed, and they even TOLD YOU it was an opinion piece

Where are "those kind" of reporters now? People whose words you can trust....who have verified a story and understand that the scoop isnt the important thing, the TRUTH was.....

 

[Superfly]

Third Grade Teachers might shudder at you barging into their level of capability, but I always like to see a person with a high self esteem, even if not justified.

So you’ve removed all the mirrors in your house, then?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Ad hominem again.
'an argument or reaction directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining'...In case youre not aware of what that is. Just to make it easier for you to stick to the topic, Ill restate my position.

lawlessness doesnt start with police. Police are a response to lawlessness among the citizens. Thus a real solution to police abuse of power is to reduce the need to give police power, by getting rid of theft and assault.

If you actually watch the videos in the article in the opening post, you will find that in every instance documented, the police were instigating violence against peaceful protestors, or in some cases people that were not even protesting.

You can whine all you want, but anyone that defends that has no business calling themselves anything but an authoritarian.

 

[Thoreau72]

I assume you meant George Floyd?

I agree that police have the potential and the record to justify suspicion.

This has been amply demonstrated at the "street level" numerous times and at the highest levels of society and government by the outrageous attacks on the President and his appointees.

In the case of the street level, the media makes things worse by presenting only half of the story.

In the case of the highest levels, the media makes things worse by presenting only half of the story.

It seems pretty obvious that the goal of the media is to make things worse. It would be nice if everyone understood that what they see on TV or on the internet is usually only half true if that.

Most people understand that stuff on the internet is suspect. For some reason, they don't understand that the Evening news is only just as reliable.

The goal of the media is to fear monger and advance certain agenda benefiting its advertisers and patrons.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I am ignoring your last paragraph, since the "stay at home orders" (making law by executive fiat?) are not related to police misconduct in any way.

That (bolded above) is a major systemic problem which should (must?) be addressed. The first need for solving any problem is to clearly defne it, thus we first need to define (identify?) who, exactly, you mean by "they". It seems to me that "they" are the public employee unions who demanded (and thus have been given) near total control over who gets fired (for cause?) and/or the state's prosecutors (since only they can initiate criminal charges) who allow the police to use "internal investigations" to "handle" such matters - so unless those "internal investigators" decide to recommend charges (make an arrest) the prosecutors are quite content to ignore such (potentially criminal?) matters ensuring that a jury of one's peers (or even a judge) never has an opportunity to determine guilt (render a verdict?).

The excuse (sometimes called a reason) most often given by prosecutors is that there was not clear evidence of guilt (beyond a reasonable doubt) so the matter was never referred to a grand jury (GJ) to take a look at what evidence was available. That excuse seems weak since it is often asserted that a GJ 'would indict a ham sandwich' since only the state's evidence is presented to the GJ for their consideration (evaluation?). So long as the judical system is left out of the loop, the entire matter of police misconduct (criminal action?) reamins completely under the control of the executive branch of government.

The problem is:

1. Allegations of police misconduct should be investigated by U.S. Attorneys rather than the local prosecutors' office that those police departments work closely with on a daily basis.

2. Settlements resulting from police misconduct currently are paid by taxpayers. Thus there is a moral hazard for police as they can conduct themselves how they want, and they pass the costs to the local taxpayers. Instead, they should be required to carry an insurance policy and settlements that a department has to pay out for police misconduct can be paid by that. That way, there is a financial incentive for them to get rid of bad cops and bad cops would result in their insurance premiums going up.

I would also point out that sometimes police departments are not accountable to city hall. For example, here in KC, its state law that the police department is independent from the local government.