Coward fatally ambushes 2 NYPD, commits suicide (1 Viewer)

[Henry Ford]

Is General Tso = MOP?

I'm confused. I've never seen anyone take over a thread like this besides Tim, and it's the first controversial thread since he got locked up.

FFA abhors a vacuum

Prefers sweeping, IMO.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Is the next NYC election going to be a 'choose De Blasio or the NYPD' thing? Because my impression has always been that the cops are very popular there, with a lot of old family connections, and a lot if good will. / I realize people have had run-ins and the like but some cities that's just how it is, don't mess with the cops. I don't think that makes them any less popular or respected as an institution. I don't see De Blasio emerging from this.

 

[On The Rocks]

I haven't read the thread, so I apologize if this has already been hashed over.

I had the news on for a few minutes this morning while they were giving whatever new angle they could on this story.

The one thing that continues to outrage me is how much the network I had on kept showing images of the scum bag shooter - Images from his instagram or twitter or wherever.

What's the point of making this clown some sort of celebrity or poster boy for the d-bags that follow.

And based on the images I saw, I have a sense they were images that he took, specifically with the idea in mind that these would be the lasting images he WANTED to be shown. Giving him exactly what he wanted. Makes me angry.

 

[Fennis]

Is the next NYC election going to be a 'choose De Blasio or the NYPD' thing? Because my impression has always been that the cops are very popular there, with a lot of old family connections, and a lot if good will. / I realize people have had run-ins and the like but some cities that's just how it is, don't mess with the cops. I don't think that makes them any less popular or respected as an institution. I don't see De Blasio emerging from this.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/poll-finds-dissatisfaction-with-new-york-city-mayor-bill-de-blasio-on-police-community-ties-1418939608

The mayor’s overall approval rating fell slightly: 47% of voters said they approved of the job he is doing, and 38% said they disapproved.

In a Quinnipiac poll last month, 49% of voters said they approved of Mr. de Blasio’s performance while 36% disapproved.

 

[Apple Jack]

I haven't read the thread, so I apologize if this has already been hashed over.

I had the news on for a few minutes this morning while they were giving whatever new angle they could on this story.

The one thing that continues to outrage me is how much the network I had on kept showing images of the scum bag shooter - Images from his instagram or twitter or wherever.

What's the point of making this clown some sort of celebrity or poster boy for the d-bags that follow.

And based on the images I saw, I have a sense they were images that he took, specifically with the idea in mind that these would be the lasting images he WANTED to be shown. Giving him exactly what he wanted. Makes me angry.

Because the "news" media have largely devolved from an industry that thrived on truth and integrity first and profit second, into a profit first and truth/dignity...meh, who cares about truth or dignity. Give the people what they want, damn the collateral damage. Wait...unless legal says we're exposed. Did legal say we're exposed? Cut to commercial!!

 

[Al O'Pecia]

Is the next NYC election going to be a 'choose De Blasio or the NYPD' thing? Because my impression has always been that the cops are very popular there, with a lot of old family connections, and a lot if good will. / I realize people have had run-ins and the like but some cities that's just how it is, don't mess with the cops. I don't think that makes them any less popular or respected as an institution. I don't see De Blasio emerging from this.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/poll-finds-dissatisfaction-with-new-york-city-mayor-bill-de-blasio-on-police-community-ties-1418939608

The mayors overall approval rating fell slightly: 47% of voters said they approved of the job he is doing, and 38% said they disapproved.

In a Quinnipiac poll last month, 49% of voters said they approved of Mr. de Blasios performance while 36% disapproved.

That poll was conducted prior to this weekend's events involving the NYPD and the escalating tension with De Blasio. I'd imagine that De Blasio's approval rating would be lower if the poll were conducted today.

 

[Gawain]

I think it's almost impossible to underrate the impact stories like the below from the Post has on Law-and-order voters.

Shabhan Ali, a neighbor of Liu, fumed outside his Bensonhurst home Sunday about de Blasio’s no-show.

“[Liu] was a hero and was protecting the city. De Blasio should pay his regards,” he said.

Him ducking reporters and not contacting the families is playing horribly int he media.

 

[shadyridr]

He visited them both today

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Is the next NYC election going to be a 'choose De Blasio or the NYPD' thing? Because my impression has always been that the cops are very popular there, with a lot of old family connections, and a lot if good will. / I realize people have had run-ins and the like but some cities that's just how it is, don't mess with the cops. I don't think that makes them any less popular or respected as an institution. I don't see De Blasio emerging from this.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/poll-finds-dissatisfaction-with-new-york-city-mayor-bill-de-blasio-on-police-community-ties-1418939608

The mayors overall approval rating fell slightly: 47% of voters said they approved of the job he is doing, and 38% said they disapproved.

In a Quinnipiac poll last month, 49% of voters said they approved of Mr. de Blasios performance while 36% disapproved.

That poll was conducted prior to this weekend's events involving the NYPD and the escalating tension with De Blasio. I'd imagine that De Blasio's approval rating would be lower if the poll were conducted today.

Right, that's what I'm speaking of. I don't get the sense they are going back or that there will be any kind of rapprochement.

 

[Gawain]

He visited them both today

Good. Hopefully the city can start moving forward.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Remember when the left pinned the gabbie Gifford shooting on Sarah Palin because of some obscure marketing piece showing giffords district with a target over it?

Yes. It was equally incensed by that. I said earlier that I think the Right is largely to blame for starting this horrible tradition of veiled physical threats against political targets. The Left is taking it to a whole new level. Thankfully the Right doesn't have rap videos.

One other aspect is social media. The kill the cops thing has its own hashtag, that's out there. People get obsessed with social media (including forums like this one by the way) and they get wrapped up in the intensity. I'd say that applies to Brinsley, aside from the ideological component. And now people will get obsessed with Brinsley

 

[mquinnjr]

Thoughts and prayers to the families of the slain officers and I hope that piece of #### rots in hell.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

He visited them both today

“We met the wife of Officer Ramos, we met his 13-year-old son who couldn’t comprehend what happened to his father,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said Saturday.

Officer Ramos had just celebrated his 40th birthday on Dec. 12. As CBS2’s Dave Carlin reported, Ramos had previously been a school safety officer with the NYPD. He would have been with the force three years this January.

Those who knew him said he loved being stationed with the 84th precinct, Carlin reported.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/20/nypd-in-mourning-after-officers-rafael-ramos-wenjian-liu-gunned-down/

Mayor Bill de Blasio met with the families of the two officers shot to death in a squad car this weekend.

The mayor and Police Commissioner William Bratton met with relatives Monday of Officers Rafael Ramos and Officer Wenjian Liu.

http://www.myfoxny.com/story/27687477/mayor-officers-families

 

[Two Deep]

What needs to come out of all this, aside from imbalanced people getting medicated, is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers) from cases involving the people in those exceptionally tight-knit departments killing people. Acknowledgement and action along those lines would go a long way to diffuse tensions.

Implying all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly is no different than thinking all black people are criminals. You are practicing "jobism".

I did not imply "all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly." Nor would that need to be the case to justify tweaking the system to where DAs from outside of the district handle homicides by cop. The goal is impartiality. There is an immediate and obvious conflict of interest. Are all DAs going to be biased or easily swayed by a department? Of course not. It's those who are that are the concern.

So the DA outside of the district won't be any more officer friendly than the DA from within the district. Is that your thought?

He shouldn't be, because he is not working with these same officers on a regular basis and does not have to depend on their testimony in other cases.

So proximity makes one fair, impartial and honest, not good character.

I didn't say that, not that you care - it seems like that there is no argument one can make that you don't mischaracterize.

I thought we were allowed to have a difference in opinion and be on opposite sides of an argument.... I understand the line of thinking, that if you get another DA from somewhere else involved you may get a more impartial decision, but what if the DA you get is less impartial than the one that was removed? Is there some kind of guarantee? I'm not a fan of knee-jerk reactions. So & so is screaming so lets do whatever we can to appease him/them. If you think your DA is biased or unfair and it is an elected position vote him out, if it is appointed position, vote his boss out.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

What needs to come out of all this, aside from imbalanced people getting medicated, is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers) from cases involving the people in those exceptionally tight-knit departments killing people. Acknowledgement and action along those lines would go a long way to diffuse tensions.

Implying all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly is no different than thinking all black people are criminals. You are practicing "jobism".

I did not imply "all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly." Nor would that need to be the case to justify tweaking the system to where DAs from outside of the district handle homicides by cop. The goal is impartiality. There is an immediate and obvious conflict of interest. Are all DAs going to be biased or easily swayed by a department? Of course not. It's those who are that are the concern.

So the DA outside of the district won't be any more officer friendly than the DA from within the district. Is that your thought?

He shouldn't be, because he is not working with these same officers on a regular basis and does not have to depend on their testimony in other cases.

So proximity makes one fair, impartial and honest, not good character.

I didn't say that, not that you care - it seems like that there is no argument one can make that you don't mischaracterize.

I thought we were allowed to have a difference in opinion and be on opposite sides of an argument.... I understand the line of thinking, that if you get another DA from somewhere else involved you may get a more impartial decision, but what if the DA you get is less impartial than the one that was removed? Is there some kind of guarantee? I'm not a fan of knee-jerk reactions. So & so is screaming so lets do whatever we can to appease him/them. If you think your DA is biased or unfair and it is an elected position vote him out, if it is appointed position, vote his boss out.

That's when state attorneys general are supposed to step in. On the other hand citizens in a town have a right to have their own juries and their own elected officials handle their own local law enforcement.

The main problem in Ferguson is that it's a black majority city and yet no one shows up to vote. All of this discussion about Ferguson being a microcosm of some larger national problem isn't true because you will find very few cities or towns with that little voter participation.

 

[rct]

What needs to come out of all this, aside from imbalanced people getting medicated, is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers) from cases involving the people in those exceptionally tight-knit departments killing people. Acknowledgement and action along those lines would go a long way to diffuse tensions.

Implying all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly is no different than thinking all black people are criminals. You are practicing "jobism".

I did not imply "all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly." Nor would that need to be the case to justify tweaking the system to where DAs from outside of the district handle homicides by cop. The goal is impartiality. There is an immediate and obvious conflict of interest. Are all DAs going to be biased or easily swayed by a department? Of course not. It's those who are that are the concern.

So the DA outside of the district won't be any more officer friendly than the DA from within the district. Is that your thought?

He shouldn't be, because he is not working with these same officers on a regular basis and does not have to depend on their testimony in other cases.

So proximity makes one fair, impartial and honest, not good character.

I didn't say that, not that you care - it seems like that there is no argument one can make that you don't mischaracterize.

I thought we were allowed to have a difference in opinion and be on opposite sides of an argument.... I understand the line of thinking, that if you get another DA from somewhere else involved you may get a more impartial decision, but what if the DA you get is less impartial than the one that was removed? Is there some kind of guarantee? I'm not a fan of knee-jerk reactions. So & so is screaming so lets do whatever we can to appease him/them. If you think your DA is biased or unfair and it is an elected position vote him out, if it is appointed position, vote his boss out.

Expressing a different opinion is not the same thing as making a Straw Man argument (like inferring that it was claimed that differences in opinion are not allowed).

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

NYPD Cadets Advised Not to Wear Uniforms in PublicNew York City police officials are now recommending that academy trainees not wear their uniforms in public, or any other clothing associating them with the NYPD.

The cadets have been informed of this so-called soft recommendation in light of the shootings of two police officers Saturday, which police commissioner Bill Bratton described as "assassinations."

Officials described the move as a common-sense precautionary step because they have also been assessing a number of copycat threats since the initial attack.

Former Det. Sgt. Joe Giacalone, who spent one of his 21 years on the force training cadets directly, said many of the police academy cadets normally wear their uniforms to and from work but they, unlike full-time officers, are unarmed.

"It doesn't matter who is wearing the uniform. It's the uniform itself [that] is the target," Giacalone told ABC News.

"The police department, because it's under siege, has to worry about protecting their own lives first."

It's not just cadets in uniform who have to worry about being associated with the NYPD, Giacalone said, because NYPD T-shirts and hats are regularly worn by those not on the force.

Giacalone said he told his father, who he said regularly wears an NYPD baseball hat to support his son, to keep the hat in the closet for the time being.

"I don't want anybody taking a potshot ... and his only relationship is that he's my father," Giacalone said.

The dress-code warning is not the only precaution the NYPD is taking today. Auxiliary officers, who are unarmed, are not being used until further notice, and every patrol has been assigned two officers.

The latter directive largely applies to foot patrols, now meaning that officers will go out in pairs when on those shifts.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/nypd-cadets-advised-wear-uniforms-public/story?id=27764613

 

[Two Deep]

What needs to come out of all this, aside from imbalanced people getting medicated, is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers) from cases involving the people in those exceptionally tight-knit departments killing people. Acknowledgement and action along those lines would go a long way to diffuse tensions.

Implying all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly is no different than thinking all black people are criminals. You are practicing "jobism".

I did not imply "all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly." Nor would that need to be the case to justify tweaking the system to where DAs from outside of the district handle homicides by cop. The goal is impartiality. There is an immediate and obvious conflict of interest. Are all DAs going to be biased or easily swayed by a department? Of course not. It's those who are that are the concern.

So the DA outside of the district won't be any more officer friendly than the DA from within the district. Is that your thought?

He shouldn't be, because he is not working with these same officers on a regular basis and does not have to depend on their testimony in other cases.

So proximity makes one fair, impartial and honest, not good character.

I didn't say that, not that you care - it seems like that there is no argument one can make that you don't mischaracterize.

I thought we were allowed to have a difference in opinion and be on opposite sides of an argument.... I understand the line of thinking, that if you get another DA from somewhere else involved you may get a more impartial decision, but what if the DA you get is less impartial than the one that was removed? Is there some kind of guarantee? I'm not a fan of knee-jerk reactions. So & so is screaming so lets do whatever we can to appease him/them. If you think your DA is biased or unfair and it is an elected position vote him out, if it is appointed position, vote his boss out.

Expressing a different opinion is not the same thing as making a Straw Man argument (like inferring that it was claimed that differences in opinion are not allowed).

How am I making a straw man argument. Is there some kind of guarantee another DA will be more impartial? If you want to make the change for perception..well then ok.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Expressing a different opinion is not the same thing as making a Straw Man argument (like inferring that it was claimed that differences in opinion are not allowed).

How am I making a straw man argument. Is there some kind of guarantee another DA will be more impartial? If you want to make the change for perception..well then ok.

You argued with someone that doesn't exist (the nonexistent person who "implied all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly") and then doubling down by pretending that those who criticize you for doing so are simply challenging your "difference of opinion." That is arguing with straw men- first by pretending someone said all officers of the law are bad/incompetent so you could disagree with the nonexistent person and then saying that someone is telling you that you're not allowed to have a "difference of opinion" when nobody said that.

 

[Two Deep]

Expressing a different opinion is not the same thing as making a Straw Man argument (like inferring that it was claimed that differences in opinion are not allowed).

How am I making a straw man argument. Is there some kind of guarantee another DA will be more impartial? If you want to make the change for perception..well then ok.

You argued with someone that doesn't exist (the nonexistent person who "implied all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly") and then doubling down by pretending that those who criticize you for doing so are simply challenging your "difference of opinion." That is arguing with straw men- first by pretending someone said all officers of the law are bad/incompetent so you could disagree with the nonexistent person and then saying that someone is telling you that you're not allowed to have a "difference of opinion" when nobody said that.

What needs to come out of all this is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers)

What does that say to you Funke?

 

[TobiasFunke]

Expressing a different opinion is not the same thing as making a Straw Man argument (like inferring that it was claimed that differences in opinion are not allowed).

How am I making a straw man argument. Is there some kind of guarantee another DA will be more impartial? If you want to make the change for perception..well then ok.

You argued with someone that doesn't exist (the nonexistent person who "implied all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly") and then doubling down by pretending that those who criticize you for doing so are simply challenging your "difference of opinion." That is arguing with straw men- first by pretending someone said all officers of the law are bad/incompetent so you could disagree with the nonexistent person and then saying that someone is telling you that you're not allowed to have a "difference of opinion" when nobody said that.

What needs to come out of all this is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers)

What does that say to you Funke?

It says to me that you can't even be bothered to finish reading someone's sentence before you throw a hissy fit.

 

[Two Deep]

Expressing a different opinion is not the same thing as making a Straw Man argument (like inferring that it was claimed that differences in opinion are not allowed).

How am I making a straw man argument. Is there some kind of guarantee another DA will be more impartial? If you want to make the change for perception..well then ok.

You argued with someone that doesn't exist (the nonexistent person who "implied all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly") and then doubling down by pretending that those who criticize you for doing so are simply challenging your "difference of opinion." That is arguing with straw men- first by pretending someone said all officers of the law are bad/incompetent so you could disagree with the nonexistent person and then saying that someone is telling you that you're not allowed to have a "difference of opinion" when nobody said that.

What needs to come out of all this is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers)

What does that say to you Funke?

It says to me that you can't even be bothered to finish reading someone's sentence before you throw a hissy fit.

The only one throwing a hissy fit now is you. I get it I don't agree with you or your friends so you feel the need to try and defend each other and take jabs...It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

 

[Apple Jack]

 

[TobiasFunke]

Expressing a different opinion is not the same thing as making a Straw Man argument (like inferring that it was claimed that differences in opinion are not allowed).

How am I making a straw man argument. Is there some kind of guarantee another DA will be more impartial? If you want to make the change for perception..well then ok.

You argued with someone that doesn't exist (the nonexistent person who "implied all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly") and then doubling down by pretending that those who criticize you for doing so are simply challenging your "difference of opinion." That is arguing with straw men- first by pretending someone said all officers of the law are bad/incompetent so you could disagree with the nonexistent person and then saying that someone is telling you that you're not allowed to have a "difference of opinion" when nobody said that.

What needs to come out of all this is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers)

What does that say to you Funke?

It says to me that you can't even be bothered to finish reading someone's sentence before you throw a hissy fit.

The only one throwing a hissy fit now is you. I get it I don't agree with you or your friends so you feel the need to try and defend each other and take jabs...It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

I promise you I'm not throwing a hissy fit. You asked a question ("how am I making a straw man argument?"), and I answered it (by twice arguing vehemently against positions that nobody has taken). If you don't like the answer don't ask the question.

 

[Two Deep]

Expressing a different opinion is not the same thing as making a Straw Man argument (like inferring that it was claimed that differences in opinion are not allowed).

How am I making a straw man argument. Is there some kind of guarantee another DA will be more impartial? If you want to make the change for perception..well then ok.

You argued with someone that doesn't exist (the nonexistent person who "implied all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly") and then doubling down by pretending that those who criticize you for doing so are simply challenging your "difference of opinion." That is arguing with straw men- first by pretending someone said all officers of the law are bad/incompetent so you could disagree with the nonexistent person and then saying that someone is telling you that you're not allowed to have a "difference of opinion" when nobody said that.

What needs to come out of all this is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers)

What does that say to you Funke?

It says to me that you can't even be bothered to finish reading someone's sentence before you throw a hissy fit.

The only one throwing a hissy fit now is you. I get it I don't agree with you or your friends so you feel the need to try and defend each other and take jabs...It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

I promise you I'm not throwing a hissy fit. You asked a question ("how am I making a straw man argument?"), and I answered it (by twice arguing vehemently against positions that nobody has taken). If you don't like the answer don't ask the question.

I'm pretty sure it is a hissy fit.

 

[shadyridr]

But the family said they forgave the man who snatched away their protector, who had been a cop for three years.

“We don’t blame him,” Ramos’ cousin Richard Gonzalez said of Brinsley. “The Ramos family forgives him. I know if Rafael was here, and it was the opposite, (he) would say the same words.”

Stuff like this amazes me how much faith people have. I can never be like this. There are much stronger people in this world than me.

 

[TobiasFunke]

What needs to come out of all this is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers)

What does that say to you Funke?

It says to me that you can't even be bothered to finish reading someone's sentence before you throw a hissy fit.

The only one throwing a hissy fit now is you. I get it I don't agree with you or your friends so you feel the need to try and defend each other and take jabs...It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

I promise you I'm not throwing a hissy fit. You asked a question ("how am I making a straw man argument?"), and I answered it (by twice arguing vehemently against positions that nobody has taken). If you don't like the answer don't ask the question.

I'm pretty sure it is a hissy fit.

I find it odd that you so readily assign moods and thoughts to people that are not reflected in their words. This is three times in one page now that you've done it. Why is that, do you think? Serious question.

 

[joffer]

Two Deep has gone to the zoo

 

[Two Deep]

What needs to come out of all this is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers)

What does that say to you Funke?

It says to me that you can't even be bothered to finish reading someone's sentence before you throw a hissy fit.

The only one throwing a hissy fit now is you. I get it I don't agree with you or your friends so you feel the need to try and defend each other and take jabs...It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

I promise you I'm not throwing a hissy fit. You asked a question ("how am I making a straw man argument?"), and I answered it (by twice arguing vehemently against positions that nobody has taken). If you don't like the answer don't ask the question.

I'm pretty sure it is a hissy fit.

I find it odd that you so readily assign moods and thoughts to people that are not reflected in their words. This is three times in one page now that you've done it. Why is that, do you think? Serious question.

If I knew what you were talking about I would answer your question.

 

[Gary Coal Man]

But the family said they forgave the man who snatched away their protector, who had been a cop for three years.

We dont blame him, Ramos cousin Richard Gonzalez said of Brinsley. The Ramos family forgives him. I know if Rafael was here, and it was the opposite, (he) would say the same words.

Stuff like this amazes me how much faith people have. I can never be like this. There are much stronger people in this world than me.

Their desire to forgive the killer makes them different than you, but not necessarily stronger.

 

[shadyridr]

Dabre said that her son struggled with mental illness his entire life and said he refused the family’s repeated attempts at help.

He tried to kill himself when he was 13 and had to be institutionalized in the years leading up to the bloody Saturday massacre that left two of New York’s Finest dead.

 

[Gandalf the Grey]

Expressing a different opinion is not the same thing as making a Straw Man argument (like inferring that it was claimed that differences in opinion are not allowed).

How am I making a straw man argument. Is there some kind of guarantee another DA will be more impartial? If you want to make the change for perception..well then ok.

You argued with someone that doesn't exist (the nonexistent person who "implied all officers of the law are bad or incapable of doing their job honestly") and then doubling down by pretending that those who criticize you for doing so are simply challenging your "difference of opinion." That is arguing with straw men- first by pretending someone said all officers of the law are bad/incompetent so you could disagree with the nonexistent person and then saying that someone is telling you that you're not allowed to have a "difference of opinion" when nobody said that.

What needs to come out of all this is removing DA's who count on their local police departments to do their jobs (and further their careers)What does that say to you Funke?

It says to me that you can't even be bothered to finish reading someone's sentence before you throw a hissy fit.

The only one throwing a hissy fit now is you. I get it I don't agree with you or your friends so you feel the need to try and defend each other and take jabs...It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

I promise you I'm not throwing a hissy fit. You asked a question ("how am I making a straw man argument?"), and I answered it (by twice arguing vehemently against positions that nobody has taken). If you don't like the answer don't ask the question.

It's pointless engaging these guys who lack very basic reading skills and comprehension. You guys have more energy than I do, that's for sure.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Dabre said that her son struggled with mental illness his entire life and said he refused the family’s repeated attempts at help.

He tried to kill himself when he was 13 and had to be institutionalized in the years leading up to the bloody Saturday massacre that left two of New York’s Finest dead.

Dabre said she was shocked when she went online and saw a photo of her son Ismaaiyl Brinsley, 28, lying on a gurney Saturday after the shooting.

“I pulled out my laptop and I went online and I saw his body and I knew he was dead when I looked at it,” Dabre told the Daily News.

“I knew when I saw it. He was gone. I knew it was my son. And that’s how I found out.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/mother-nypd-killer-ismaaiyl-brinsley-deeply-article-1.2053710

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Remember when the left pinned the gabbie Gifford shooting on Sarah Palin because of some obscure marketing piece showing giffords district with a target over it?

Yes. It was equally incensed by that. I said earlier that I think the Right is largely to blame for starting this horrible tradition of veiled physical threats against political targets. The Left is taking it to a whole new level. Thankfully the Right doesn't have rap videos.

One other aspect is social media. The kill the cops thing has its own hashtag, that's out there. People get obsessed with social media (including forums like this one by the way) and they get wrapped up in the intensity. I'd say that applies to Brinsley, aside from the ideological component. And now people will get obsessed with Brinsley

Seconds before a cop-hating maniac ambushed and gunned down two NYPD officers in cold blood, he asked two men to follow him on Instagram, boasting, “Watch what I’m going to do!”

Ismaaiyl Brinsley’s twisted advertisement of his assassination of Officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu was revealed Sunday as detectives probed the motive for Saturday’s shocking double murder in Brooklyn.

Just prior to killing Ramos, 40, and Liu, 32, as they sat in their cruiser outside the Tompkins Houses in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brinsley approached two men to offer an unsolicited heads-up on the pending doom.

He first inquired about the men’s gang affiliation, and then asked them to follow him on the photo-sharing site, NYPD Chief of Detectives Robert Boyce said Sunday.

“He then said, ‘Watch what I’m going to do!’ ” Boyce said.

Brinsley, 28, then walked past the police cruiser before circling around and firing four shots at the cops, hitting one in the head and the other in the neck, Boyce said.

He said detectives were interviewing the two men to whom Brinsley spoke, but believe they had nothing to do with the attack.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/nypd-monitors-social-media-death-threats-cops-article-1.2052600

 

[jonessed]

Great, that's all of the characters minus tim. Once he gets here we can officially close this one.

 

[TobiasFunke]

But the family said they forgave the man who snatched away their protector, who had been a cop for three years.

“We don’t blame him,” Ramos’ cousin Richard Gonzalez said of Brinsley. “The Ramos family forgives him. I know if Rafael was here, and it was the opposite, (he) would say the same words.”

Stuff like this amazes me how much faith people have. I can never be like this. There are much stronger people in this world than me.

Eric Garner's youngest daughter attended the NYPD memorial:

"I just had to come out and let their family know that we stand with them, and I’m going to send my prayers and condolences to all the families who are suffering through this tragedy," she told ABC News. "I was never anti-police. Like I said before, I have family that’s in the NYPD that I’ve grown up around, family reunions and everything so my family you know, we’re not anti-police."

Sometimes people aren't so bad.

link

 

[General Tso]

I haven't read the thread, so I apologize if this has already been hashed over.

I had the news on for a few minutes this morning while they were giving whatever new angle they could on this story.

The one thing that continues to outrage me is how much the network I had on kept showing images of the scum bag shooter - Images from his instagram or twitter or wherever.

What's the point of making this clown some sort of celebrity or poster boy for the d-bags that follow.

And based on the images I saw, I have a sense they were images that he took, specifically with the idea in mind that these would be the lasting images he WANTED to be shown. Giving him exactly what he wanted. Makes me angry.

Because the "news" media have largely devolved from an industry that thrived on truth and integrity first and profit second, into a profit first and truth/dignity...meh, who cares about truth or dignity. Give the people what they want, damn the collateral damage. Wait...unless legal says we're exposed. Did legal say we're exposed? Cut to commercial!!

Oh God it pains me to say this, but Jack is on to something here. The media has completely abrogated it's responsibilities over the last 20 years, and with the explosion of social media everything is condensed into 140 character headlines designed to grab attention. Communication used to be a lot more thoughtful and calmer. Today it is designed to rile people up and get a reaction. The free speech of 2014 is vastly different than the free speech of 1791. In today's world it is much more prone to excite people's emotions, inflame their passions, and yes - I will make the jump - influence their actions.Not sure what the answer is. I don't like the idea of curbing free speech, but there are hate law statutes on the books as well as other exceptions to free speech (inciting a riot, incitement to violence, etc) that we've implemented over the years. I'd like to think as a country there's still enough commonality between us to draft basic standards outlining what is unacceptable. And by that I mean overt calls for "dead cops" by an angry mob marching through the streets. Can't we all agree that at a minimum something like this should be prosecuted?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I haven't read the thread, so I apologize if this has already been hashed over.

I had the news on for a few minutes this morning while they were giving whatever new angle they could on this story.

The one thing that continues to outrage me is how much the network I had on kept showing images of the scum bag shooter - Images from his instagram or twitter or wherever.

What's the point of making this clown some sort of celebrity or poster boy for the d-bags that follow.

And based on the images I saw, I have a sense they were images that he took, specifically with the idea in mind that these would be the lasting images he WANTED to be shown. Giving him exactly what he wanted. Makes me angry.

Because the "news" media have largely devolved from an industry that thrived on truth and integrity first and profit second, into a profit first and truth/dignity...meh, who cares about truth or dignity. Give the people what they want, damn the collateral damage. Wait...unless legal says we're exposed. Did legal say we're exposed? Cut to commercial!!

Oh God it pains me to say this, but Jack is on to something here. The media has completely abrogated it's responsibilities over the last 20 years, and with the explosion of social media everything is condensed into 140 character headlines designed to grab attention. Communication used to be a lot more thoughtful and calmer. Today it is designed to rile people up and get a reaction. The free speech of 2014 is vastly different than the free speech of 1791. In today's world it is much more prone to excite people's emotions, inflame their passions, and yes - I will make the jump - influence their actions.Not sure what the answer is. I don't like the idea of curbing free speech, but there are hate law statutes on the books as well as other exceptions to free speech (inciting a riot, incitement to violence, etc) that we've implemented over the years. I'd like to think as a country there's still enough commonality between us to draft basic standards outlining what is unacceptable. And by that I mean overt calls for "dead cops" by an angry mob marching through the streets. Can't we all agree that at a minimum something like this should be prosecuted?

We've already been down this road with Al Sharpton at Crown Heights.

Serial race-baiter Al Sharpton is credited with saying, “If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house" as a response the Crown Heights riot. That is a fallacy; he made that threatening comment to the Jewish community about the growing Jeffries controversy on August 18th the day before the riots began. Clearly something bad was coming.

In all, the street violence against the Crown Heights Jews lasted three days/four nights starting with the evening of the accident. On Thursday evening, cops finally restored order, although sporadic violence against Jews continued for weeks after the riot was contained.

Yankel Rosenbaum wasn't the only person murdered by the rioters. On September 5th, Italian-American, Anthony Graziosi, was dragged out of his car, brutally beaten and stabbed to death because his full beard and dark clothing caused him to be mistaken for a Hasidic Jew.

During the funeral of Gavin Cato on August 26th, Al Sharpton gave an anti-Semitic eulogy, which fueled the fires of hatred.

“The world will tell us he was killed by accident. Yes, it was a social accident. ... It's an accident to allow an apartheid ambulance service in the middle of Crown Heights. ... Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid. ... All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffe klatsch, no skinnin' and grinnin'. Pay for your deeds."
Regarding the Mayor's call for peace Sharpton pontificated:

"They don't want peace, they want quiet."
Sharpton and the lawyer representing the Cato family counseled them not to cooperate with authorities in the investigation and demanded a special prosecutor be named.

Sharpton was asked about the violence, he justified it,

“We must not reprimand our children for outrage, when it is the outrage that was put in them by an oppressive system," he said.
The first Sabbath after the Funeral Sharpton tried unsuccessfully to kick up tensions again by marching 400 protesters in front of the Lubavitch of Crown Heights shouting “No Justice, No Peace."

http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2012/03/real-al-sharpton-incitement-of-1991.html

So... this is the man consulting the White House.

 

[Fennis]

I have an overwhelming urge to mention Al Sharpton and Crown Heights.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I have an overwhelming urge to mention Al Sharpton and Crown Heights.

Good point, inviting him into closed door discussions on race relations is like inviting Captain Edward Smith to teach a sailing class.

 

[Apple Jack]

I have an overwhelming urge to mention Al Sharpton and Crown Heights.

Do it!

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I have an overwhelming urge to mention Al Sharpton and Crown Heights.

Do it!

Better yet don't do it.

 

[Fennis]

I have an overwhelming urge to mention Al Sharpton and Crown Heights.

Do it!

Better yet don't do it.

TitanicTalk

 

[Billy Bats]

But the family said they forgave the man who snatched away their protector, who had been a cop for three years.

We dont blame him, Ramos cousin Richard Gonzalez said of Brinsley. The Ramos family forgives him. I know if Rafael was here, and it was the opposite, (he) would say the same words.

Stuff like this amazes me how much faith people have. I can never be like this. There are much stronger people in this world than me.

Eric Garner's youngest daughter attended the NYPD memorial:

"I just had to come out and let their family know that we stand with them, and Im going to send my prayers and condolences to all the families who are suffering through this tragedy," she told ABC News. "I was never anti-police. Like I said before, I have family thats in the NYPD that Ive grown up around, family reunions and everything so my family you know, were not anti-police."

Sometimes people aren't so bad.

link

She had me all aboard until she excused the two executions with mental illness.

 

[Fennis]

But the family said they forgave the man who snatched away their protector, who had been a cop for three years.

We dont blame him, Ramos cousin Richard Gonzalez said of Brinsley. The Ramos family forgives him. I know if Rafael was here, and it was the opposite, (he) would say the same words.

Stuff like this amazes me how much faith people have. I can never be like this. There are much stronger people in this world than me.

Eric Garner's youngest daughter attended the NYPD memorial:

"I just had to come out and let their family know that we stand with them, and Im going to send my prayers and condolences to all the families who are suffering through this tragedy," she told ABC News. "I was never anti-police. Like I said before, I have family thats in the NYPD that Ive grown up around, family reunions and everything so my family you know, were not anti-police."

Sometimes people aren't so bad.

link

She had me all aboard until she excused the two executions with mental illness.

mental illness is not an excuse for the murders. Its an explanation.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

I'd like to think as a country there's still enough commonality between us to draft basic standards outlining what is unacceptable. And by that I mean overt calls for "dead cops" by an angry mob marching through the streets. Can't we all agree that at a minimum something like this should be prosecuted?

No.

 

[General Tso]

I haven't read the thread, so I apologize if this has already been hashed over.

I had the news on for a few minutes this morning while they were giving whatever new angle they could on this story.

The one thing that continues to outrage me is how much the network I had on kept showing images of the scum bag shooter - Images from his instagram or twitter or wherever.

What's the point of making this clown some sort of celebrity or poster boy for the d-bags that follow.

And based on the images I saw, I have a sense they were images that he took, specifically with the idea in mind that these would be the lasting images he WANTED to be shown. Giving him exactly what he wanted. Makes me angry.

Because the "news" media have largely devolved from an industry that thrived on truth and integrity first and profit second, into a profit first and truth/dignity...meh, who cares about truth or dignity. Give the people what they want, damn the collateral damage. Wait...unless legal says we're exposed. Did legal say we're exposed? Cut to commercial!!

Oh God it pains me to say this, but Jack is on to something here. The media has completely abrogated it's responsibilities over the last 20 years, and with the explosion of social media everything is condensed into 140 character headlines designed to grab attention. Communication used to be a lot more thoughtful and calmer. Today it is designed to rile people up and get a reaction. The free speech of 2014 is vastly different than the free speech of 1791. In today's world it is much more prone to excite people's emotions, inflame their passions, and yes - I will make the jump - influence their actions.Not sure what the answer is. I don't like the idea of curbing free speech, but there are hate law statutes on the books as well as other exceptions to free speech (inciting a riot, incitement to violence, etc) that we've implemented over the years. I'd like to think as a country there's still enough commonality between us to draft basic standards outlining what is unacceptable. And by that I mean overt calls for "dead cops" by an angry mob marching through the streets. Can't we all agree that at a minimum something like this should be prosecuted?

We've already been down this road with Al Sharpton at Crown Heights.

Serial race-baiter Al Sharpton is credited with saying, If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house" as a response the Crown Heights riot. That is a fallacy; he made that threatening comment to the Jewish community about the growing Jeffries controversy on August 18th the day before the riots began. Clearly something bad was coming.

In all, the street violence against the Crown Heights Jews lasted three days/four nights starting with the evening of the accident. On Thursday evening, cops finally restored order, although sporadic violence against Jews continued for weeks after the riot was contained.

Yankel Rosenbaum wasn't the only person murdered by the rioters. On September 5th, Italian-American, Anthony Graziosi, was dragged out of his car, brutally beaten and stabbed to death because his full beard and dark clothing caused him to be mistaken for a Hasidic Jew.

During the funeral of Gavin Cato on August 26th, Al Sharpton gave an anti-Semitic eulogy, which fueled the fires of hatred.

The world will tell us he was killed by accident. Yes, it was a social accident. ... It's an accident to allow an apartheid ambulance service in the middle of Crown Heights. ... Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid. ... All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffe klatsch, no skinnin' and grinnin'. Pay for your deeds."

Regarding the Mayor's call for peace Sharpton pontificated:

"They don't want peace, they want quiet."

Sharpton and the lawyer representing the Cato family counseled them not to cooperate with authorities in the investigation and demanded a special prosecutor be named.Sharpton was asked about the violence, he justified it,

We must not reprimand our children for outrage, when it is the outrage that was put in them by an oppressive system," he said.

The first Sabbath after the Funeral Sharpton tried unsuccessfully to kick up tensions again by marching 400 protesters in front of the Lubavitch of Crown Heights shouting No Justice, No Peace."

http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2012/03/real-al-sharpton-incitement-of-1991.htmlSo... this is the man consulting the White House.

Oh, I know all about Crown Heights. I went to school at one of the centers of the Black Muslim movement back then, and ran in similar circles with some of those radicals. I knew all too well the "free speech" they were spouting back then.But that was almost a quarter of a century ago. Pre-internet. A lot has changed since then.

 

[General Tso]

I'd like to think as a country there's still enough commonality between us to draft basic standards outlining what is unacceptable. And by that I mean overt calls for "dead cops" by an angry mob marching through the streets. Can't we all agree that at a minimum something like this should be prosecuted?

No.

You know, I've developed a coping mechanism to deal with you. I just look at your avatar and imagine all these answers coming from the cat. It works.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

I'd like to think as a country there's still enough commonality between us to draft basic standards outlining what is unacceptable. And by that I mean overt calls for "dead cops" by an angry mob marching through the streets. Can't we all agree that at a minimum something like this should be prosecuted?

No.

You know, I've developed a coping mechanism to deal with you. I just look at your avatar and imagine all these answers coming from the cat. It works.

You asked a question and I answered.

 

[Gawain]

I'd like to think as a country there's still enough commonality between us to draft basic standards outlining what is unacceptable. And by that I mean overt calls for "dead cops" by an angry mob marching through the streets. Can't we all agree that at a minimum something like this should be prosecuted?

No.

You know, I've developed a coping mechanism to deal with you. I just look at your avatar and imagine all these answers coming from the cat. It works.

Should Ice-T have been prosecuted for Cop Killer?