What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Another killing at the hands of the Police (2 Viewers)

Rich Conway said:
I don't know if this particular suggestion would be better or worse than, say, tasers.  But, non-lethal options exist now, yet police frequently jump straight to the lethal option.  I question the assumption that adding yet another non-lethal option would lead to different outcomes.
Click to expand...
From what I’ve seen recently tasers are a pretty shoddy option, wouldn’t want my life depending on one working.

 
djmich said:
From what I’ve seen recently tasers are a pretty shoddy option, wouldn’t want my life depending on one working.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily disagree.  My point is that if someone here is throwing out suggestions like "tranquilizers", I guess I'm expecting some data backing up the idea and showing me that it's a viable option and better than options that already exist.

 
Rich Conway said:
I don't necessarily disagree.  My point is that if someone here is throwing out suggestions like "tranquilizers", I guess I'm expecting some data backing up the idea and showing me that it's a viable option and better than options that already exist.
Click to expand...
Right, there are no good non lethal options today.  Would seem like an area yearning for innovation.

 
When Police Kill

A major factor in the number of deaths caused by police shootings is the number of wounds received by the victim. In Chicago, 20% of victims with one wound died, 34% with two wounds and 74% with five or more wounds. Obvious. But it suggests a reevaluation of the police training to empty their magazine. Zimring suggests that if the first shot fired was due to reasonable fear the tenth might not be
Click to expand...
Police kill many more people in the United States than in other developed countries, even adjusting for crime rates (where the U.S. is less of an outlier than most people imagine). The obvious reason is that there are a lot of guns in the United States. As a result, the United States is not going to get its police killing rate down to Germany’s which is at least 40 times lower.
Click to expand...

 
Nugget said:
Police kill many more people in the United States than in other developed countries, even adjusting for crime rates (where the U.S. is less of an outlier than most people imagine). The obvious reason is that there are a lot of guns in the United States. As a result, the United States is not going to get its police killing rate down to Germany’s which is at least 40 times lower
Click to expand...
How many countries do you think had fewer shootings than just Chicago last year? 

 
Nugget said:
Police kill many more people in the United States than in other developed countries, even adjusting for crime rates (where the U.S. is less of an outlier than most people imagine). The obvious reason is that there are a lot of guns in the United States. As a result, the United States is not going to get its police killing rate down to Germany’s which is at least 40 times lower.
Click to expand...
maybe we have more violent people ?

 
Nugget said:
Maybe we have more Stand Your Ground laws?

“Stand your Ground” laws lead to more homicides
Click to expand...
LOL

the core problem of course is people who are putting people in positions to defend themselves but look at how this VOX article leads the reader - the increase in people dying are the criminals dying and what number of lives are saved by people protecting themselves? I didn't see that in the article did you ?

"

Morral and Smart explained the root of the problem: “Although approximately 40,000 Americans die annually from gunshot injuries, and two or three times this number sustain non-fatal gunshot injuries, the federal government currently spends a fraction as much on gun violence prevention research as it does on other causes of death that kill similar numbers of people.”

When it comes to “stand your ground” laws, though, we are getting stronger evidence — and it indicates that these laws in particular are dangerous."

why did they use the 40,000 number? why didn't they mention 2/3 of that number is suicide which has NOTHING to do with stand your ground laws. That's shameful reporting right there, just awful.

the Govt doesn't spend money on prevention because we have stacks of laws saying don't attack people, don't shoot at people, don't assault people - you know, the things that trigger a victim to defend themselves

 
Stealthycat said:
LOL

the core problem of course is people who are putting people in positions to defend themselves but look at how this VOX article leads the reader - the increase in people dying are the criminals dying and what number of lives are saved by people protecting themselves? I didn't see that in the article did you ?

"

Morral and Smart explained the root of the problem: “Although approximately 40,000 Americans die annually from gunshot injuries, and two or three times this number sustain non-fatal gunshot injuries, the federal government currently spends a fraction as much on gun violence prevention research as it does on other causes of death that kill similar numbers of people.”

When it comes to “stand your ground” laws, though, we are getting stronger evidence — and it indicates that these laws in particular are dangerous."

why did they use the 40,000 number? why didn't they mention 2/3 of that number is suicide which has NOTHING to do with stand your ground laws. That's shameful reporting right there, just awful.

the Govt doesn't spend money on prevention because we have stacks of laws saying don't attack people, don't shoot at people, don't assault people - you know, the things that trigger a victim to defend themselves
Click to expand...
Vox is a joke.  It's basically Pravda for the left with a different name.  Nothing believable comes from that online rag.

 
Possum said:
agreed on all counts, but I'll go a little further than you on 3 and 4: these protests are starting to lose the plot and do more harm than good to public willingness to support change when people are going nuts over stupid stuff like this, and I think the authorities ought to act decisively to shut them down as soon as there's any type of violence or destruction of property. 
Click to expand...
Many believe this, unfortunately, there are mayors, city councilmen, state legislators and many other elected officials who not only haven't done this all spring and summer, but they have instead spoke out on behalf of this behavior, encouraged it and refused to condemn it. 

 
Possum said:
agreed on all counts, but I'll go a little further than you on 3 and 4: these protests are starting to lose the plot and do more harm than good to public willingness to support change when people are going nuts over stupid stuff like this, and I think the authorities ought to act decisively to shut them down as soon as there's any type of violence or destruction of property. 
Click to expand...
So, let's look at this situation and update.

First of all, the rioters that caused damage are already moving to trial court.

Secondly, it looks like all the protests have already died down and it hasn't even been a week.  And I think a huge reason for this is how quickly and responsive the police department was in releasing the video and acknowledging the situation.  While there's still the issue of how to deal with a mental health crisis such as this, the answer to stopping the protests (and any rioting that goes along with it) is to address the original problem that caused the protests to begin with.  When that's the case, there's nothing to protest anymore.  The answer isn't for the authorities to "act decisively" while ignoring what set off the protest to begin with.

And here is a good article to read about this situation and mental health in general

 
gianmarco said:
So, let's look at this situation and update.

First of all, the rioters that caused damage are already moving to trial court.

Secondly, it looks like all the protests have already died down and it hasn't even been a week.  And I think a huge reason for this is how quickly and responsive the police department was in releasing the video and acknowledging the situation.  While there's still the issue of how to deal with a mental health crisis such as this, the answer to stopping the protests (and any rioting that goes along with it) is to address the original problem that caused the protests to begin with.  When that's the case, there's nothing to protest anymore.  The answer isn't for the authorities to "act decisively" while ignoring what set off the protest to begin with.

And here is a good article to read about this situation and mental health in general
Click to expand...
"Seth Gardner, 21, had charges of misdemeanor propulsion of missiles"

Seems like they should either upgrade this to a felony or stop referring to whatever it was as a missile.

Unless of course he had a disarmed sidewinder missile that he just threw at a car or something then perhaps the charge makes sense.  

 
gianmarco said:
So, let's look at this situation and update.

First of all, the rioters that caused damage are already moving to trial court.

Secondly, it looks like all the protests have already died down and it hasn't even been a week.  And I think a huge reason for this is how quickly and responsive the police department was in releasing the video and acknowledging the situation.  While there's still the issue of how to deal with a mental health crisis such as this, the answer to stopping the protests (and any rioting that goes along with it) is to address the original problem that caused the protests to begin with.  When that's the case, there's nothing to protest anymore.  The answer isn't for the authorities to "act decisively" while ignoring what set off the protest to begin with.

And here is a good article to read about this situation and mental health in general
Click to expand...
appreciate the info, g - the second article is informative, and it's tragic that Munoz lost his life. But I still think the immediate angry protests and sometimes violent reaction to this incident - most of which happened after the video was released showing Munoz charging the officer with a knife - demonstrated a serious lack of critical thinking by the people involved and did nothing positive for anyone at all. When people were protesting over the cops killing George Floyd, I was 100% behind it, but when people are taking to the streets in anger and causing riots anytime someone gets shot by the police - even if clear evidence shows that person was actively trying to kill the officer who shot them - then to me things are going off the rails in the wrong direction.

I also realize I didn't word my original post very well, either, and that's my bad. I agree with you that only focusing on violence at protests and ignoring the root cause is a terrible strategy. And I agree that releasing the video right away was a great decision that eventually helped to defuse the situation. I feel like police should be required by law to wear cameras everywhere when on duty and that footage should be available to the media and public as soon as possible, anytime they request it. I know the cops usually want to keep it in-house during an investigation, but I think they ought to aim for complete transparency as much as possible and at least release an edited video like they did in this case.

but I also think that once any protest, no matter how justified it might be, crosses the line from peaceful to people burning or looting or destroying property, then it's time for the authorities to move in, disperse the crowd as peacefully as possible and temporarily end the demonstration. It seems like the vast majority of the violence and destruction that's been going on the last few months happens at night where it's harder to identify specific individuals in large groups, so shutting things down for the night and letting the protesters cool off and return the next day seems to be the best, safest and most fair course of action for everyone. 

and as long things stay peaceful and don't get crazy and violent, then I say go for it and protest all day and night, too. I just don't have any sympathy for angry mobs of people who decide to burn and destroy stuff, and I think there needs to be a stronger response to those actions both for immediate control and future deterrence. To me that kind of behavior does nothing to advance a cause, it only serves to entrench and strengthen opposition.

 
Possum said:
appreciate the info, g - the second article is informative, and it's tragic that Munoz lost his life. But I still think the immediate angry protests and sometimes violent reaction to this incident - most of which happened after the video was released showing Munoz charging the officer with a knife - demonstrated a serious lack of critical thinking by the people involved and did nothing positive for anyone at all. When people were protesting over the cops killing George Floyd, I was 100% behind it, but when people are taking to the streets in anger and causing riots anytime someone gets shot by the police - even if clear evidence shows that person was actively trying to kill the officer who shot them - then to me things are going off the rails in the wrong direction.

I also realize I didn't word my original post very well, either, and that's my bad. I agree with you that only focusing on violence at protests and ignoring the root cause is a terrible strategy. And I agree that releasing the video right away was a great decision that eventually helped to defuse the situation. I feel like police should be required by law to wear cameras everywhere when on duty and that footage should be available to the media and public as soon as possible, anytime they request it. I know the cops usually want to keep it in-house during an investigation, but I think they ought to aim for complete transparency as much as possible and at least release an edited video like they did in this case.

but I also think that once any protest, no matter how justified it might be, crosses the line from peaceful to people burning or looting or destroying property, then it's time for the authorities to move in, disperse the crowd as peacefully as possible and temporarily end the demonstration. It seems like the vast majority of the violence and destruction that's been going on the last few months happens at night where it's harder to identify specific individuals in large groups, so shutting things down for the night and letting the protesters cool off and return the next day seems to be the best, safest and most fair course of action for everyone. 

and as long things stay peaceful and don't get crazy and violent, then I say go for it and protest all day and night, too. I just don't have any sympathy for angry mobs of people who decide to burn and destroy stuff, and I think there needs to be a stronger response to those actions both for immediate control and future deterrence. To me that kind of behavior does nothing to advance a cause, it only serves to entrench and strengthen opposition.
Click to expand...
Actually, the rioting with property damage/looting happened the night of the killing. All the arrests stemmed from that night. The video was released the next day. That following night, the protest was much smaller and peaceful without violence.  I posted about that already.

I agree in some respects that things are going in the wrong direction. Even here, protesting without knowing the situation, not ideal but it is understandable. But, as one would hope, once the video was released and most saw the justification, the protests mostly went away. Those out there are mostly doing it in regards to killing a mentally ill person, which from what I read were primarily family and friends and is similarly understandable.

We are in virtual agreement with the rest. Let them protest peacefully. I would even prefer officers not even get involved. And any rioting/violence/looting should be dealt with as soon as possible. It would be nice, however, to try and do so without stopping the rest that are out there peacefully even though I understand that's not always possible or realistic. But just because a couple idiots set fire to a dumpster doesn't mean the police should get to tell the entire crowd to disperse or they are going to jail.

This case, though, in my opinion, shows how far transparency can go to helping control these situations. I would wager a decent amount we'd still see significant protests there had that video not been released.

 
gianmarco said:
Actually, the rioting with property damage/looting happened the night of the killing. All the arrests stemmed from that night. The video was released the next day. That following night, the protest was much smaller and peaceful without violence.  I posted about that already.

I agree in some respects that things are going in the wrong direction. Even here, protesting without knowing the situation, not ideal but it is understandable. But, as one would hope, once the video was released and most saw the justification, the protests mostly went away. Those out there are mostly doing it in regards to killing a mentally ill person, which from what I read were primarily family and friends and is similarly understandable.

We are in virtual agreement with the rest. Let them protest peacefully. I would even prefer officers not even get involved. And any rioting/violence/looting should be dealt with as soon as possible. It would be nice, however, to try and do so without stopping the rest that are out there peacefully even though I understand that's not always possible or realistic. But just because a couple idiots set fire to a dumpster doesn't mean the police should get to tell the entire crowd to disperse or they are going to jail.

This case, though, in my opinion, shows how far transparency can go to helping control these situations. I would wager a decent amount we'd still see significant protests there had that video not been released.
Click to expand...
no worries - we agree on most everything. I thought the video was released Sunday evening with the protests going pretty far into Monday morning, but if I have the timeline messed up then mea culpa.

and I agree that something like a single dumpster fire is probably relatively minor (unless it was right next to a building or something) and wouldn't warrant shutting everything down. I think once people start breaking windows, looting, or burning cars and buildings that has to have a serious response, though, or not only do the jerks doing that stuff get emboldened to do more destructive acts, the citizens and business owners start getting antsy and scared and bringing guns to try to protect their property.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
KarmaPolice said:
What makes us many times more violent than other countries? 
Click to expand...
that's a good question and thus the  "?"

the chaos I see on tv from the cities across the USA blows my mind. That people will loot and steal and burn their own streets and neighborhoods .... that aint normal and its not common or normal IMO anywhere in the world to do that

its almost like a cultural thing now :(  

 
Stealthycat said:
that's a good question and thus the  "?"

the chaos I see on tv from the cities across the USA blows my mind. That people will loot and steal and burn their own streets and neighborhoods .... that aint normal and its not common or normal IMO anywhere in the world to do that

its almost like a cultural thing now :(  
Click to expand...
Boston Tea Party?

And multiple acts by white people burning down homes in black neighborhoods in our past.

"Riots are the voice of the unheard." Paraphrasing MLK.

I'm sure such riots have occurred elsewhere in the world. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stealthycat said:
that's a good question and thus the  "?"

the chaos I see on tv from the cities across the USA blows my mind. That people will loot and steal and burn their own streets and neighborhoods .... that aint normal and its not common or normal IMO anywhere in the world to do that

its almost like a cultural thing now :(  
Click to expand...
The quote we are talking about is why we have so many police shootings.  Isn't the bolded a reaction to the shootings, not the cause of the shootings?

You said that maybe it's because we as a country are just multiple times more violent than other countries.  I guess I am of the opinion that we are not fundamentally different as humans than other parts of the world.   So if you take the belief that we are that much more violent, I would think that you would have to have reasons why that is.  

IMO more could be tied to the prevalence of guns.  A good portion of the articles and reasons I see for a police shooting is because the person shot had a gun, looked like they were reaching for a gun, etc..   I know we disagree on this part, but I don't think as many incidents would be happening if cops had the threat of a criminal reaching for a ______ where blank is basically anything but a gun.  

 
SoBeDad said:
Boston Tea Party?
Click to expand...
omg still ?

Did anyone die during the Boston Tea Party? No. No one died during the Boston Tea Party. There was no violence and no confrontation between the Patriots, the Tories and the British soldiers garrisoned in Boston.

Boston Tea Party Facts | Boston History

 
Anybody watch the video yet of the killing of the guy in Washington? That's the worst one yet I have seen. Police officer charged with murder. Honestly the first shot I wouldn't have advocated for criminal charges. The second shot when you shoot a man in the head that you had already shot in the chest and he is on the ground and you wait a while before firing, yeah, thats an execution. (it is from a while ago, charges were filed last month I just came across an article this morning and watched the video.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
parasaurolophus said:
Anybody watch the video yet of the killing of the guy in Washington? That's the worst one yet I have seen. Police officer charged with murder. Honestly the first shot I wouldn't have advocated for criminal charges. The second shot when you shoot a man in the head that you had already shot in the chest and he is on the ground and you wait a while before firing, yeah, thats an execution. (it is from a while ago, charges were filed last month I just came across an article this morning and watched the video.)
Click to expand...
Is this the story?

If so, shocking the guy has a long history of violence and was still out there.

 
1 indictment in Breonna Taylor case

Developing

ETA - 1 officer - wanton endangerment indictment 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yamiche Alcindor@Yamiche·2m

Former Louisville Metro Police Department Detective Brett Hankison has been charged with three counts of first-degree wanton endangerment by the grand jury in the fatal shooting of Breonna Taylor.

No other officer has been charged at this time.

 
Jamiles Lartey

@Jamiles

·

9m

The 3 counts were all for firing shots into apartments that were NOT Breonna Taylor's apartment. The initials of those residents were "C.D." "T.M" and "Z.F"

Hankison WAS charged for his behavior that night.

He was not charged for shooting at, hitting, or killing Breonna Taylor.

 
Stealthycat said:
omg still ?

Did anyone die during the Boston Tea Party? No. No one died during the Boston Tea Party. There was no violence and no confrontation between the Patriots, the Tories and the British soldiers garrisoned in Boston.

Boston Tea Party Facts | Boston History
Click to expand...
How many were armed? ;)

 
gianmarco said:
Is this the story?

If so, shocking the guy has a long history of violence and was still out there.
Click to expand...
That's the guy. 

The following is my own personal theory. I have no evidence or inside info, this is just what I think happened. I think the officer realized after the first shot that Sarey was incapacitated and no longer a risk. I think he also then realized that Sarey had in fact got a hold of his knife(which was not in Sarey's possession at time of either shot) and was like Aw hell no, you tried to get my knife? That's why I think he then fired the second shot in his forehead purely out of anger and revenge.

The delay makes no sense in any other context that I can think of. We know the knife was a big part of Nelson's report. We know that Sarey didnt have it when he was shot and we know that he went for it and dropped it too far before being shot the first time for Nelson to have shot him in response to going for the knife. 

 
Sinn Fein said:
Jamiles Lartey

@Jamiles

·

9m

The 3 counts were all for firing shots into apartments that were NOT Breonna Taylor's apartment. The initials of those residents were "C.D." "T.M" and "Z.F"

Hankison WAS charged for his behavior that night.

He was not charged for shooting at, hitting, or killing Breonna Taylor.
Click to expand...
So shooting into neighboring apartments bad...but not shooting into Breonna Taylor?

And there are people that still wonder why people are protesting and wanting police reform?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
parasaurolophus said:
That's the guy. 

The following is my own personal theory. I have no evidence or inside info, this is just what I think happened. I think the officer realized after the first shot that Sarey was incapacitated and no longer a risk. I think he also then realized that Sarey had in fact got a hold of his knife(which was not in Sarey's possession at time of either shot) and was like Aw hell no, you tried to get my knife? That's why I think he then fired the second shot in his forehead purely out of anger and revenge.

The delay makes no sense in any other context that I can think of. We know the knife was a big part of Nelson's report. We know that Sarey didnt have it when he was shot and we know that he went for it and dropped it too far before being shot the first time for Nelson to have shot him in response to going for the knife. 
Click to expand...
That shooting took place in May, 2019.  He is just now getting charged for murder in September, 2020 with the video only now getting released.

And once again, people wonder why there are protests for police reform. 

It's not just on this officer for the accused murder he committed.  It's on the entire force that kept him there despite that history AND taking this long to have any kind of action against him. 

 
sho nuff said:
So shooting into neighboring apartments bad...but not shooting into Breonna Taylor?

And there are people that still wonder why people are protesting and wanting police reform?
Click to expand...
My takeaway from watching Cameron was this:

The investigation concluded that the police returned fire after being fired upon and hit.  Returning fire isn't a violation of the law.  Breonna Taylor was in the apartment that had fired at the police.  While it's an absolute tragedy, the position of Cameron and crew is that the law wasn't violated.  

Then somehow this cop is shooting into other apartment buildings.  That was deemed as wonton endangerment.  And thus the charges.

 
Jackstraw said:
Why do you give someone 12 million dollars for a justified shooting?  :confused:
Click to expand...
Civil liability and criminal liability are two separate issues.

From a criminal liability standpoint - I am assuming the officers involved were doing what they trained to do - and when fired upon, they returned fire - in this case killing someone not involved in the gunfight.

This is a systemic problem - whether its the no-knock warrants in general, or the circumstances that led to this particular incident.  Those create civil liabilities to the police department/City, but do not necessarily give rise to criminal liability to the officers.

Its complicated - more complicated than a mob is going to really understand - but I don't see a lot of effort to educate on those issues.

For example - the AG calls for a task-force today to study no-knock warrants - that should have been done six months ago (if not before).  That is a tone-deafness that could have alleviated some unrest if the state/city/police raised their hands and said - yes we have some problems in how we police, and we need to find better solutions, and we want the community to help be a part of those solutions.

But to raise the task force issue now, just sounds like - "Yikes, we better do something here!"

 
jm192 said:
My takeaway from watching Cameron was this:

The investigation concluded that the police returned fire after being fired upon and hit.  Returning fire isn't a violation of the law.  Breonna Taylor was in the apartment that had fired at the police.  While it's an absolute tragedy, the position of Cameron and crew is that the law wasn't violated.  

Then somehow this cop is shooting into other apartment buildings.  That was deemed as wonton endangerment.  And thus the charges.
Click to expand...
There are a number of open questions that still need to be answered.  Why are there no body camera videos available?  We know for a fact that at least two of the officers had body cameras.

 
Rich Conway said:
There are a number of open questions that still need to be answered.  Why are there no body camera videos available?  We know for a fact that at least two of the officers had body cameras.
Click to expand...
Sure.  I'm not arguing with anyone.  That was what I took away from listening to DC. 

 
jm192 said:
My takeaway from watching Cameron was this:

The investigation concluded that the police returned fire after being fired upon and hit.  Returning fire isn't a violation of the law.  Breonna Taylor was in the apartment that had fired at the police.  While it's an absolute tragedy, the position of Cameron and crew is that the law wasn't violated.  

Then somehow this cop is shooting into other apartment buildings.  That was deemed as wonton endangerment.  And thus the charges.
Click to expand...
I didn't listen to the DA but I read most of what he said through twitter.

1) I don't believe him that there was nothing they could charge these guys with. He/the grand jury interpreted the facts in a way that this was the legal result. I feel very confident another interpretation of the facts would lead to charges.

2) If he's right and there was no way to charge these guys, then the law is extremely ####ed up. Which, we know it is.

Also, Breonna's family's lawyer tweeted that they charged the cop with shooting into the white neighbor's house but not into the black neighbor upstair's apt. I don't know how accurate those facts are, but I'd be really curious to know a) if what he says is true and b) why the cop wasn't charged for firing into that neighbor's unit.

 
From @Popehat - who sums it up well - 

It’s important to look at the terrible, immoral decisions that make up every link of the chain that led to Breonna Taylor’s death: the war on drugs, the decision to pursue the war violently, consequence-free bogus warrants, no-knock warrants, forcible entries calculated /1...

2....to lead to violence, indifference to adequate training, military cop culture, and a culture that lethally combines “be an American and defend your home with a gun” with all of those things.

 
gianmarco said:
That shooting took place in May, 2019.  He is just now getting charged for murder in September, 2020 with the video only now getting released.

And once again, people wonder why there are protests for police reform. 

It's not just on this officer for the accused murder he committed.  It's on the entire force that kept him there despite that history AND taking this long to have any kind of action against him. 
Click to expand...
Due process?  I'm not saying people play games, attorneys drag feet, the process is littered with red tape or anything but there is a pretty fundamental process that, while it takes time...lots of it...too much in many cases...it is also the thing that protects many of us from being wrongly accused and prosecuted in a haphazard manner.  

Several years ago my wife was in an accident that led to her filing a suit because of the ridiculous games played by the insurance company.  After a year, she said we will just settle this in court.  Well, once the lawyers got involved it took another SIX years.  Seven years to settle what was obvious and ended the exact way we thought it would the day it happened.  But, on the other hand, we did have our process. 

 
KarmaPolice said:
The quote we are talking about is why we have so many police shootings.  Isn't the bolded a reaction to the shootings, not the cause of the shootings?

You said that maybe it's because we as a country are just multiple times more violent than other countries.  I guess I am of the opinion that we are not fundamentally different as humans than other parts of the world.   So if you take the belief that we are that much more violent, I would think that you would have to have reasons why that is.  

IMO more could be tied to the prevalence of guns.  A good portion of the articles and reasons I see for a police shooting is because the person shot had a gun, looked like they were reaching for a gun, etc..   I know we disagree on this part, but I don't think as many incidents would be happening if cops had the threat of a criminal reaching for a ______ where blank is basically anything but a gun.  
Click to expand...
I don't know where it exists but I am willing to guess that both sides of these things get skewed stats to manipulate the outcome. It may not be the case that people get shot because guns are present. It COULD be (just playing devil's advocate) that more stories get published about people getting shot when guns are involved but many never go reported (like the little boy who saved his grandmother from a home invasion because he had a gun.  Yes, someone got shot because guns were present, but in that case, it was legit and that story didn't get national coverage).

All in all, guns are deterrents as much as they are anything else. They are neutral, not bad or good, without factoring in the skill of the person with a gun, the intent, etc, etc. Wasn't it just  month ago they had some crazy numbers about how many people have been shot in Chicago in what is technically a gun prohibited city, yet Maine or somewhere has an open gun law and had like 3 shootings in the entire year?  It comes down to people and sadly, many people feel entitled and aren't as willing to value the sanctity of life as they once were. 

 
whoknew said:
I didn't listen to the DA but I read most of what he said through twitter.

1) I don't believe him that there was nothing they could charge these guys with. He/the grand jury interpreted the facts in a way that this was the legal result. I feel very confident another interpretation of the facts would lead to charges.

2) If he's right and there was no way to charge these guys, then the law is extremely ####ed up. Which, we know it is.

Also, Breonna's family's lawyer tweeted that they charged the cop with shooting into the white neighbor's house but not into the black neighbor upstair's apt. I don't know how accurate those facts are, but I'd be really curious to know a) if what he says is true and b) why the cop wasn't charged for firing into that neighbor's unit.
Click to expand...
A lot of things went wrong.  
 

I don’t think the goal should be “can we find SOMETHING” to charge them with or “Can we interpret the law in a way to get them?”

 
Wise words from the Kentucky AG...

“There will be celebrities, influencers and activists who having never lived in Kentucky will try to tell us how to feel, suggesting they understand the facts of this case, that they know our community and the Commonwealth better than we do, but they don’t," Cameron said. “Let’s not give in to their attempts to influence our thinking or capture our emotions.”

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2020/sep/23/celebrities-decry-decision-in-breonna-taylor-case/

 
Stoneworker said:
Wise words from the Kentucky AG...

“There will be celebrities, influencers and activists who having never lived in Kentucky will try to tell us how to feel, suggesting they understand the facts of this case, that they know our community and the Commonwealth better than we do, but they don’t," Cameron said. “Let’s not give in to their attempts to influence our thinking or capture our emotions.”

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2020/sep/23/celebrities-decry-decision-in-breonna-taylor-case/
Click to expand...
This dude is going places. 

 
SoBeDad said:
Boston Tea Party?

And multiple acts by white people burning down homes in black neighborhoods in our past.

"Riots are the voice of the unheard." Paraphrasing MLK.

I'm sure such riots have occurred elsewhere in the world. 
Click to expand...
Actually, I think it might have a lot to do with how we have come to romanticize the protests of the 1960s. People in this generation want to get a piece of that – being part of a movement that is bigger than themselves, standing up for what they think is right, etc.

You could even argue that the violence we see now is proportional in terms of shock value to what folks in the 1960s were doing In their day. Burning draft cards may have been as extreme a reaction for its time as throwing fireworks at policemen is now. I’m not sure I’m willing to go that far, as I wasn’t there. However, I do believe that the cultural norm of looking back fondly at the act of making a scene to promote your cause in the face of authority has, in part, led us to where we are today. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Witz
Obama Tweets
Replies
42
Views
1K
dozer
dozer
GordonGekko
How NYC Bodega Clerk Jose Alba's "Self Defense" Became Political Persecution ( 7/10/22 2:12 PST)
2
Replies
97
Views
2K
parasaurolophus
parasaurolophus
GordonGekko
MSM Silent As Drunk Driver Released After Killing Teenager He Falsely Accused Of Being A "Republican Extremist" (10/4/22 16:34 PST)
2 3
Replies
111
Views
3K
squistion
squistion

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top