Shots fired

darkpagandeath

Seems some people are not happy with the verdict and actions of the Ferguson police department. And have now taken to shooting police officers. I don't ever think it was as simple as white cops killing black people. If you can form the mind set of shooting police I think there is a very very disturbed underlying problem in the Area.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0312/686452-us-police-shooting/

hatrickpatrick

It wasn't as simple as white cops killing black people in my view, it was even simpler - cops in general being able to shoot non cops in general without any consequences or penalties whatsoever in the US. Even in cases where there is mind bogglingly clear video evidence of cops brutalizing someone, they don't get convicted and they rarely even make it to trial.

The American police operate entirely outside the law and absent of any meaningful oversight.

darkpagandeath

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It wasn't as simple as white cops killing black people in my view, it was even simpler - cops in general being able to shoot non cops in general without any consequences or penalties whatsoever in the US. Even in cases where there is mind bogglingly clear video evidence of cops brutalizing someone, they don't get convicted and they rarely even make it to trial.

The American police operate entirely outside the law and absent of any meaningful oversight.

Well that's not exactly true. The police officer involved was not charged via a jury or federal probe that had no reason not to raise charges if there was any to answer to.

Neither a grand jury nor the federal probe led to charges against Mr Wilson

BeerWolf

Expect this to become more frequently, regular Joe American is getting fed up of Cops consistently never getting punished for their crimes, simply because they're Cops, which comes with special treatment... and as such, regardless of all the evidence, you NEVER see them serving jail time... at most getting fired ["let go"].

All a cops needs to say is they "feared for their life" - that's a keyword to let them away with anything, ESPECIALLY killing people's dogs.

Generic Dreadhead

Reverse Vigilantism

darkpagandeath

BeerWolf wrote: »

Expect this to become more frequently, regular Joe American is getting fed up of Cops consistently never getting punished for their crimes, simply because they're Cops, which comes with special treatment... and as such, regardless of all the evidence, you NEVER see them serving jail time... at most getting fired ["let go"].

All a cops needs to say is they "feared for their life" - that's a keyword to let them away with anything, ESPECIALLY killing people's dogs.

I'm sure then if it is such and easy job to get on with, You know constant threat of violence at every turn. That people complaining about the police will join the police force and show them how it's done and how they are doing it wrong.

Have cops shot innocent, I'm sure they have But the thing you have to ask yourself. Put yourself in the police officers shoes. They have split seconds to decide, People on here have hindsight and month to talk it over.

biko

“They say that 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' Well I think the gun helps. If you just stood there and yelled BANG, I don't think you'd kill too many people.”

uch

What about "Bang Bang"

TommyOM

You are obsessed with racial issues. Its kinda odd

cerastes

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I'm sure then if it is such and easy job to get on with, You know constant threat of violence at every turn. That people complaining about the police will join the police force and show them how it's done and how they are doing it wrong.

Have cops shot innocent, I'm sure they have But the thing you have to ask yourself. Put yourself in the police officers shoes. They have split seconds to decide, People on here have hindsight and month to talk it over.

Seems to be the case in many instances they put themselves under split second time to pull up and shoot someone, recall that kid recently where they pulled up to him a and just shot him, they gave him no opportunity to surrender.
In others they seem to be looking for an excuse to shoot people, no doubt certain problems are so much worse, and they no doubt face a much worse threat, but not when they are in numbers.

creolebelle

TommyOM wrote: »

You are obsessed with racial issues. Its kinda odd

Quite a few posters on here seem obsessed with american racial issues

cerastes

creolebelle wrote: »

Quite a few posters on here seem obsessed with american racial issues

As someone suggested it seems to be a case of the police forces shooting any one they want, or generally using excessive force,
Police forces that go around tooled up in a paramilitary manner garb attitude are out with the wrong message.

Wacker The Attacker

uch wrote: »

What about "Bang Bang"

Hey hi diddly-eye and out goes she.

SEPT 23 1989

they all need to calm down a bit

KungPao

I struggle to see why these things make big news in Ireland.

hatrickpatrick

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Well that's not exactly true. The police officer involved was not charged via a jury or federal probe that had no reason not to raise charges if there was any to answer to.

They almost never do. There is a paradigm of "assume a cop discharged a firearm rightfully unless proven otherwise". In my opinion, cops should have to justify any escalation, ie firing a shot should itself be against the law unless you can show that it had to be done.

I'm against the principle of armed police or citizens anyway though so I'm biased. I don't believe in lethal force.

creolebelle

cerastes wrote: »

As someone suggested it seems to be a case of the police forces shooting any one they want, or generally using excessive force,
Police forces that go around tooled up in a paramilitary manner garb attitude are out with the wrong message.

Yes all this true. But shooting at police officers is the wrong way to express your anger and is def the wrong message to send

hatrickpatrick

KungPao wrote: »

I struggle to see why these things make big news in Ireland.

To provide ammunition for those who defend scandal ridden justice people and attack GSOC. They have to have prominent news stories to point to and say "look what goes on there, we could have it worse so stop complaining"

Egginacup

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Well that's not exactly true. The police officer involved was not charged via a jury or federal probe that had no reason not to raise charges if there was any to answer to.

That's oversimplifying the issue. The prosecutor actually directed the Grand Jury NOT to seek an indictment. Why? God only knows, but that is more rare than hen's teeth.

The phrase "the prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich" is a common one but in this case he steered the issue in the other direction.

Anyway, however you want to paint it this strikes me as a fairly clear case of "blowback".

Egginacup

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I'm sure then if it is such and easy job to get on with, You know constant threat of violence at every turn. That people complaining about the police will join the police force and show them how it's done and how they are doing it wrong.

Have cops shot innocent, I'm sure they have But the thing you have to ask yourself. Put yourself in the police officers shoes. They have split seconds to decide, People on here have hindsight and month to talk it over.

When those two cops broke the back of that 70 year old Indian man in Alabama were they in fear for their lives? I mentioned before that you're more likely to get killed in the line of duty if you are a construction labourer, farm worker, trawlerman, etc. than you are if you are a cop.

It's not as lethal a job as it's made out to be.

Egginacup

cerastes wrote: »

Seems to be the case in many instances they put themselves under split second time to pull up and shoot someone, recall that kid recently where they pulled up to him a and just shot him, they gave him no opportunity to surrender.
In others they seem to be looking for an excuse to shoot people, no doubt certain problems are so much worse, and they no doubt face a much worse threat, but not when they are in numbers.

Wasn't there a case where a cop shot a guy who had a fcuking tattoo of a gun on his chest?
If that cop was dragged into court and the judge told him that he was a retard and that he was going to jail for his stupidity a lot of other cops would snap out of their trance of cretinism and say "shit, I'd better grow a few braincells and think before I shoot someone instead of just pulling the trigger and pleading ignorance afterwards"

Egginacup

creolebelle wrote: »

Yes all this true. But shooting at police officers is the wrong way to express your anger and is def the wrong message to send

Well I'd say that these people have had their fair share of peaceful demonstrations, candelight vigils and outreach programs that the cops just ignore and continue with their heavy handed tactics.

true567

biko wrote: »

“They say that 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' Well I think the gun helps. If you just stood there and yelled BANG, I don't think you'd kill too many people.”

Really dumb post.

That argument is mostly tossed around by people who want to ban guns in the States but I can guarantee you that those firearms were not legally obtained by the shooter nor owned. They were Ferguson protestors after all. So essentially you would be penalizing law abiding citizens because of these retards. Moreover, if someone yelled BANG while stabbing you in the neck repeatedly with a knife they would kill you. This would have never happened if it wasn't for people like you and others around the world who think that thug was innocent (even though the evidence clearly states otherwise) and brought mass hysteria to that community full of uneducated, easily manipulatable people with nothing better to do than protest til early hours of the morning for months on and shoot family men with jobs contributing to their respective community.

darkpagandeath

TommyOM wrote: »

You are obsessed with racial issues. Its kinda odd

Really ? Does that make me a racist now ?

creolebelle

Egginacup wrote: »

Well I'd say that these people have had their fair share of peaceful demonstrations, candelight vigils and outreach programs that the cops just ignore and continue with their heavy handed tactics.

Yes but reacting with violence is what the ferguson police department wants. It gives them excuse to use heavy handed tactics

darkpagandeath

creolebelle wrote: »

Yes but reacting with violence is what the ferguson police department wants. It gives them excuse to use heavy handed tactics

Really ? Shots fired police actually shot, Shots were not enough to go heavy handed if they were looking for an excuse ? People really are grabbing at straws.

creolebelle

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Really ? Shots fired police actually shot, Shots were not enough to go heavy handed if they were looking for an excuse ? People really are grabbing at straws.

What?

riffmongous

I saw some stats on the German police yesterday, only 85 bullets fired by the entire force in 2011!

nxbyveromdwjpg

Egginacup wrote: »

When those two cops broke the back of that 70 year old Indian man in Alabama were they in fear for their lives? I mentioned before that you're more likely to get killed in the line of duty if you are a construction labourer, farm worker, trawlerman, etc. than you are if you are a cop.

It's not as lethal a job as it's made out to be.

A while ago now but this doosey of mistaken identity is a another good one, they fired 41 shots at the guy. He was reaching for his wallet.

Manic Moran

creolebelle wrote: »

Yes but reacting with violence is what the ferguson police department wants. It gives them excuse to use heavy handed tactics

Perhaps, but the Fergusun PD weren't on duty. Those were county cops that were shot. There were police from a number of jurisdictions on duty precisely to make sure that nobody from Fergusun PD had to show up.

creolebelle

Manic Moran wrote: »

Perhaps, but the Fergusun PD weren't on duty. Those were county cops that were shot. There were police from a number of jurisdictions on duty precisely to make sure that nobody from Fergusun PD had to show up.

All that's true but the main argument against these protests is that certain "communities"need tough deadly police tactics and shooting at cops (kind of ) proves them right

Manic Moran

I think there are two separate issues.

One is the unfair discrimination against those communities. The other is the level of force which is necessary. Ferguson is a perfect case in point, if the DOJ's reports are to be taken as correct: There was a systemic issue of discrimination in how the city government (to include the police) treated the community, but when something goes down on the street, each incident has to be taken on its own merits, and in the case of Wilson and Brown, the evidence established that the shooting was objectively reasonable. (Not 'couldn't be proven as unreasonable', the DOJ's report was affirmative in its conclusion). Unfortunately or otherwise, messing with cops -is- going to result in deadly police tactics, and enough cops get shot at that you can't blame them for it.