11 police shot, 4 officers dead after coordinated sniper fire at Dallas protest rally

Little CuChulainn · 09-07-2016 10:13PM

dimwittedrep wrote: »

Shooter who knew he was extremely likely to die and engaged the entire armed Dallas police force in a running battle was a coward. Police who sent in a remote controlled robot and blew him up were brave. Yeah.
Can you edit dictionary.com there because these are pretty much the opposite of any accepted definition of bravery and cowardice.
As 100+ posts ago, your only backing you have for calling the shooter a coward is "I don't like what he did". Neither do I BTW, but that's immaterial in this discussion.

Maybe he thought he'd survive, maybe he intended to take his own life or maybe he didn't care if he lived or died. None of those make him particularly brave because they all involve avoiding facing up to his actions. You think he was brave because you think he was prepared to die for his beliefs but he could simply have been suicidal or simply done with life.

As for the police, they all ran towards the shooting despite being outgunned and at a tactical disadvantage. This makes them brave in my view.

walshyn93 · 09-07-2016 10:13PM

Gatling wrote: »

Weren't you calling them to be banned yesterday?

:supporters are full of people with a tendency toward violence or people who generally encourage acts of violence."

Bit of a reach and generalisation of a protest group so far peacefully protesting across the US for the most part .

As for the meme ( Jeremy )

I don't recall actually calling for them to be banned, but regardless, it's possible to simultaneously think that a group SHOULD be banned whilst realising that it's not legally possible to do so.

dimwittedrep · 09-07-2016 10:14PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

Whilst probably not meeting the criteria to be labelled as a terror group, their rhetoric and actions show that they and their supporters are full of people with a tendency toward violence or people who generally encourage acts of violence. I've seen cartoon memes shared by friends today (I may be revising that) on facebook from the US depicting a cop being executed ISIS style and people were saying stuff like "put them pigs in blankets".

Why not just use the Fox standard for deciding if they are terrorists? "Do I like them or not."
Why, what magically happens when you decided you can call them terrorists? You know outside the USA people don't automatically agree you are right when you drop "turrst" into every second sentence?

Gatling · 09-07-2016 10:17PM

New unconfirmed reports saying the shooter used a Saiga Ak-74 fitted with a red dot for accuracy .

walshyn93 · 09-07-2016 10:18PM

dimwittedrep wrote: »

Why not just use the Fox standard for deciding if they are terrorists? "Do I like them or not."
Why, what magically happens when you decided you can call them terrorists? You know outside the USA people don't automatically agree you are right when you drop "turrst" into every second sentence?

Designating them a terrorist organisation means they can't legally raise funding among other things. Maybe if you looked into the law instead of watching FOX news you might know that. They have raised an enormous amount of funding and if some one decided to take it in a different direction it could morph into a well funded terrorist organisation.

dimwittedrep · 09-07-2016 10:20PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Maybe he thought he'd survive, maybe he intended to take his own life or maybe he didn't care if he lived or died. None of those make him particularly brave because they all involve avoiding facing up to his actions. You think he was brave because you think he was prepared to die for his beliefs but he could simply have been suicidal or simply done with life.

As for the police, they all ran towards the shooting despite being outgunned and at a tactical disadvantage. This makes them brave in my view.

If somebody has set themselves a mission and they don't care if they live or die then they can't possibly be brave? Do you even scan what you've typed before hitting send? That's pretty much the nailed on definition right there: dying for your beliefs. He told the police that's what he was doing. I suppose your next line will be that he was lying and was really suicidal.
Maybe the dead cops wanted to die? How do you know they didn't? That's exactly what it sounds like when say the same thing about the shooter.

dimwittedrep · 09-07-2016 10:22PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

Designating them a terrorist organisation means they can't legally raise funding among other things. Maybe if you looked into the law instead of watching FOX news you might know that. They have raised an enormous amount of funding and if some one decided to take it in a different direction it could morph into a well funded terrorist organisation.

And if pigs could fly and me aunt had balls...
Maybe if the Dallas police did X, Y and Z they'd morph into the US Khmer Rouge. It's possible, right?

Gatling · 09-07-2016 10:25PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

They have raised an enormous amount of funding and if some one decided to take it in a different direction it could morph into a well funded terrorist organisation.

Sensationalist statement ,

There not a terrorist group your liking a peaceful protest group to the Black Panthers for some reason

walshyn93 · 09-07-2016 10:31PM

dimwittedrep wrote: »

And if pigs could fly and me aunt had balls...
Maybe if the Dallas police did X, Y and Z they'd morph into the US Khmer Rouge. It's possible, right?

It's not at all unlikely given America's history. When I see people saying they want to kill cops, I believe them.

walshyn93 · 09-07-2016 10:32PM

Gatling wrote: »

Sensationalist statement ,

There not a terrorist group your liking a peaceful protest group to the Black Panthers for some reason

No, it's not a terrorist group as I have already stated. But it could easily morph into one. It happened in North Ireland where the (peaceful) civil rights movement morphed into paramilitary activity. It's not sensationalist if it has happened dozens of times in many different places.

History tends to repeat itself.

Sweetemotion · 09-07-2016 10:38PM

The sooner BLM gets classed as a terrorist organisation the better.

Gatling · 09-07-2016 10:41PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

It's not sensationalist if it has happened dozens of times in many different places.

History tends to repeat itself.

Sorry it's tabloid nonsense northern ireland has no comparison to this ,

Sweetemotion · 09-07-2016 10:45PM

Gatling wrote: »

Sorry it's tabloid nonsense northern ireland has no comparison to this ,

Sorry but that is just your opinion.

Out of curiosity, how does it not compare?

Little CuChulainn · 09-07-2016 10:52PM

dimwittedrep wrote: »

If somebody has set themselves a mission and they don't care if they live or die then they can't possibly be brave? Do you even scan what you've typed before hitting send? That's pretty much the nailed on definition right there: dying for your beliefs. He told the police that's what he was doing. I suppose your next line will be that he was lying and was really suicidal.
Maybe the dead cops wanted to die? How do you know they didn't? That's exactly what it sounds like when say the same thing about the shooter.

It's hardly bravery to act if you don't think there will be consequences to live with. You are assuming this person was brave because you are assuming he valued his life. I see nothing to indicate that he intended to get out of the situation alive or valued his life.

walshyn93 · 09-07-2016 10:57PM

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Sorry but that is just your opinion.

Out of curiosity, how does it not compare?

Because it's not convenient for him for it to compare.

Sand · 09-07-2016 11:08PM

The problem with the BLM group (and its celebrity and political twitter support) is that it validates a very dubious narrative that US police forces murder black people because they're black, and that this is a real and active threat to black people that they need to consider.

When the narrative of police death squads hunting for black people to murder is given validation, then why are people surprised that angry, violent or mentally unwell black people try to murder police officers? The police are out to get them - the smart guy on TV said so. So better get them first.

Black people in the US are vastly, vastly more likely to be killed by another black non-police officer than they are to be killed by a police officer. They are far more likely to be killed by heart disease, cancer, stroke or accidental injuries. The problem has to put into context if its going to stop being used to enable and excuse murder.

BorneTobyWilde · 10-07-2016 12:42AM

Dallas police HQ on lock down. Threat alert.
Swat team out

hatrickpatrick · 10-07-2016 01:04AM

I feel like all the discussions around racism, profiling etc miss a deeper point: The whole business of the police in America getting away with what can only be described as summary executions needs to stop.

As far as I'm concerned, even within the parameters of innocent until proven guilty, shooting someone dead should automatically be regarded as wrongful unless you can prove that you had a right to do it. That doesn't compromise due process - you should still be considered innocent of pulling the trigger until you have been confirmed beyond reasonable doubt as the person who pulled it - but after that, it should be up to you to justify why you did it. Shooting a gun at somebody should be considered murder or attempted murder by default, with the onus being on the shooter to justify their actions. And this should extend to cops.

The reason people are so angry in the US isn't just about the cops killing people, it's also about the fact that they're pretty much 100% guaranteed to get away with it. Killing a human being should be regarded as a crime in all but the most desperate of circumstances, and should merit jail time unless you can demonstrate that the person you killed was an immediate and clear threat to your life or to somebody else's.

In other words: The "cops can shoot whoever they like and not suffer any consequences" paradigm needs to end, and end immediately. Otherwise this situation will get worse, and worse, and worse.

Gatling · 10-07-2016 01:52AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

In other words: The "cops can shoot whoever they like and not suffer any consequences" paradigm needs to end, and end immediately. Otherwise this situation will get worse, and worse, and worse.

That's what posters don't get ,there too busy oh look the fatherless black men are making themselves vocal label them as terrorists and put them back in there place .

Cops in america are trigger and are happy judge judge, jury ,and execute suspects who are actually complying with there directions ,
Lack of decent training and a total inability to defuse a multitude of situations first and only thought is shoot and watch people die while standing around waiting for an ambulance.

The vast majority of police service's can do the same job while not shooting and killing people for minor offences.

walshyn93 · 10-07-2016 02:18AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I feel like all the discussions around racism, profiling etc miss a deeper point: The whole business of the police in America getting away with what can only be described as summary executions needs to stop.

As far as I'm concerned, even within the parameters of innocent until proven guilty, shooting someone dead should automatically be regarded as wrongful unless you can prove that you had a right to do it. That doesn't compromise due process - you should still be considered innocent of pulling the trigger until you have been confirmed beyond reasonable doubt as the person who pulled it - but after that, it should be up to you to justify why you did it. Shooting a gun at somebody should be considered murder or attempted murder by default, with the onus being on the shooter to justify their actions. And this should extend to cops.

The reason people are so angry in the US isn't just about the cops killing people, it's also about the fact that they're pretty much 100% guaranteed to get away with it. Killing a human being should be regarded as a crime in all but the most desperate of circumstances, and should merit jail time unless you can demonstrate that the person you killed was an immediate and clear threat to your life or to somebody else's.

In other words: The "cops can shoot whoever they like and not suffer any consequences" paradigm needs to end, and end immediately. Otherwise this situation will get worse, and worse, and worse.

That's generally not true. The more egregious examples like the man running away who was shot in the back by the fat lazy cop who didn't want to chase him ended up getting charged. In fact, any time I see one and think "that's definitely illegal" it turns out he gets convicted. The controversy only comes from the ones where there's a bit of a grey area or dodgy video.

The only exception which comes to mind is the one where the white kid buying weed gets shot as he's driving away. That cop got away with it, but it wasn't racially motivated to it got very little traction.

walshyn93 · 10-07-2016 02:26AM

Gatling wrote: »

That's what posters don't get ,there too busy oh look the fatherless black men are making themselves vocal label them as terrorists and put them back in there place .

Cops in america are trigger and are happy judge judge, jury ,and execute suspects who are actually complying with there directions ,
Lack of decent training and a total inability to defuse a multitude of situations first and only thought is shoot and watch people die while standing around waiting for an ambulance.

The vast majority of police service's can do the same job while not shooting and killing people for minor offences.

Do you have any idea how many cops get shot by people who appear at first to be complying? The people who do this aren't always erratic when confronted. A cop never knows if someone's got a few pounds of coke in the boot and really really doesn't want to go to jail.

I posts stats earlier that demonstrate how a cop is 4 times more likely to get shot than shoot a black man.

Gatling · 10-07-2016 02:39AM

walshyn93 wrote: »

Do you have any idea how many cops get shot by people who appear at first to be complying

How many out of the 42

tritium · 10-07-2016 10:22AM

Gatling wrote: »

How many out of the 42

As we discussed earlier, FBI record the average for felonious murder of police at 64 per year. No idea how many more are injured but recover.

tritium · 10-07-2016 10:31AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I feel like all the discussions around racism, profiling etc miss a deeper point: The whole business of the police in America getting away with what can only be described as summary executions needs to stop.

As far as I'm concerned, even within the parameters of innocent until proven guilty, shooting someone dead should automatically be regarded as wrongful unless you can prove that you had a right to do it. That doesn't compromise due process - you should still be considered innocent of pulling the trigger until you have been confirmed beyond reasonable doubt as the person who pulled it - but after that, it should be up to you to justify why you did it. Shooting a gun at somebody should be considered murder or attempted murder by default, with the onus being on the shooter to justify their actions. And this should extend to cops.

The reason people are so angry in the US isn't just about the cops killing people, it's also about the fact that they're pretty much 100% guaranteed to get away with it. Killing a human being should be regarded as a crime in all but the most desperate of circumstances, and should merit jail time unless you can demonstrate that the person you killed was an immediate and clear threat to your life or to somebody else's.

In other words: The "cops can shoot whoever they like and not suffer any consequences" paradigm needs to end, and end immediately. Otherwise this situation will get worse, and worse, and worse.

That somewhat oversimplifies things (though it aligns with the picture often painted). Take a look at the washington post database linked earlier in this thread and a more subtle picture appears. For the 2015 data the vast majority of victims were either armed or actively involved on an attack. Of the remainder (about 5%), a large segment based on the detail reported can be seen to have an element of threat or danger. Yes there are still cases that are disturbingly vague as to what justified the killing, but a relatively small number compared to the 1500 deaths per year. It's utterly disingenuous to use that overall figure to argue cops are out of control, which is fully understood by the people doing it.

Little CuChulainn · 10-07-2016 10:55AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I feel like all the discussions around racism, profiling etc miss a deeper point: The whole business of the police in America getting away with what can only be described as summary executions needs to stop.

As far as I'm concerned, even within the parameters of innocent until proven guilty, shooting someone dead should automatically be regarded as wrongful unless you can prove that you had a right to do it. That doesn't compromise due process - you should still be considered innocent of pulling the trigger until you have been confirmed beyond reasonable doubt as the person who pulled it - but after that, it should be up to you to justify why you did it. Shooting a gun at somebody should be considered murder or attempted murder by default, with the onus being on the shooter to justify their actions. And this should extend to cops.

The reason people are so angry in the US isn't just about the cops killing people, it's also about the fact that they're pretty much 100% guaranteed to get away with it. Killing a human being should be regarded as a crime in all but the most desperate of circumstances, and should merit jail time unless you can demonstrate that the person you killed was an immediate and clear threat to your life or to somebody else's.

In other words: The "cops can shoot whoever they like and not suffer any consequences" paradigm needs to end, and end immediately. Otherwise this situation will get worse, and worse, and worse.

Gatling wrote: »

That's what posters don't get ,there too busy oh look the fatherless black men are making themselves vocal label them as terrorists and put them back in there place .

Cops in america are trigger and are happy judge judge, jury ,and execute suspects who are actually complying with there directions ,
Lack of decent training and a total inability to defuse a multitude of situations first and only thought is shoot and watch people die while standing around waiting for an ambulance.

The vast majority of police service's can do the same job while not shooting and killing people for minor offences.

Spoken like two people who will never be in any kind of dangerous situation in their whole lives.

Again we have the "cops in america" phrase being used. There are so many different departments who do things differently. Lumping them together is lazy and irresponsible and leads to incidents like Dallas where one of the most progressive and diverse departments in the country has just lost four officers. Not only that, but when police in other departments are shown Dallas PD as an example of how they should act they can simply point to the shootings and say "Why bother if that's the thanks you get."

Most police departments put officers involved in shootings on administrative leave following the shooting. Most departments conduct internal investigations on every shooting. Many shootings result in criminal investigations also. How much more wrong can you make a shooting off the bat? The reason police get off many shootings is because most of them are justified. It's a violent country with near unlimited access to weapons and a disdain for authority.

You can give out about people criticising #BLM but the fact is that black society in the states is violent, racist and in many cases desperate. You can blame the white man, the government or the man for this. It doesn't really matter, that's simply the state of the culture. The statistics are all there for violence within the black community. The police can't fix that, they can only respond to it. Asking them to adopt a more relaxed approach without a similar commitment from the other side, such as the BLM movement, is asking them to put their lives on the line for nothing. Dallas is a prime example of this.

Xenji · 10-07-2016 11:35AM

I see that RTE when reporting on the protests that took place last night, word for word copied an article from the Huffington Post, not the first time this week since the shooting they have done it and on the main news page they use the whole article with no credit given to the original reporters.

http://www.rte.ie/aertel//desktopxhtml/105-1.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/protests-over-police-shootings-block-roads-in-us-cities_us_5781ba6ae4b0344d514fa02b

Bob24 · 10-07-2016 11:42AM

Xenji wrote: »

I see that RTE when reporting on the protests that took place last night, word for word copied an article from the Huffington Post, not the first time this week since the shooting they have done it and on the main news page they use the whole article with no credit given to the original reporters.

http://www.rte.ie/aertel//desktopxhtml/105-1.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/protests-over-police-shootings-block-roads-in-us-cities_us_5781ba6ae4b0344d514fa02b

The content is from Reuters. Both RTE and the Huffington post purchased it from them ready to publish.

Welcome to the world of free and readily available information on the internet - no money to pay journalists so you get the some content everywhere.

Gatling · 10-07-2016 11:54AM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Again we have the "cops in america" phrase being used. There are so many different departments who do things differently. Lumping them together is lazy and irresponsible

You can give out about people criticising #BLM but the fact is that black society in the states is violent, racist and in many cases desperate.

Is that not been a tad bit hypocritical

tritium · 10-07-2016 12:01PM

Gatling wrote: »

Is that not been a tad bit hypocritical

No more or less hypocritical than the sweeping statements out there that US police are racist but applying a more nuanced assessment of the communities they police ?

Gatling · 10-07-2016 12:04PM

tritium wrote: »

No more or less hypocritical than the sweeping statements out there that US police are racist but applying a more nuanced assessment of the communities they police ?

What's cops are trigger happy that's what I said .

If there was no issues about police racial
profiling ,violence and killings why are there so many protests taking place across the country and it's not just Black's protesting

11 police shot, 4 officers dead after coordinated sniper fire at Dallas protest rally

Comments