|
|
Post by sdsuball on Jul 4, 2022 0:20:03 GMT -8
I don't need to read those articles to know that there's corruption in law enforcement, or that there's a high percentage of police officers and firemen that cheat on their wives, and abuse them. I've known a few of them, unfortunately. From seeing your back and forth in this thread, it appears that you tend to give LEOs the benefit of the doubt. That means you need to read more. I don't even think it's about benefit of the doubt, I think that it's a biological fight or flight response, when it's police officers chasing someone who shot at him. Like from a biological perspective, animals are hardwired to harm and kill anyone who is trying to harm or kill them. Police officers are animals, just like all of us are. These types of issues in police chase gone wrong types of situation will not go away until technology can compensate for hardwired human deficiencies. Like it may be cyborg-esque police officers that have body cameras that can see in infrared, that could actually detect if the person has a gun or not in real time. They could use AI machine learning to (through millions and millions of data points) be able to determine if someone running away and then turning is a threat or is surrendering, something that humans cannot always see in fight or flight mode. That AI could intervene and either prevent the bullet from firing, or perhaps there will be guns that are part taser/part normal gun that can shoot either type of bullet - but the artifical intelligence tells the gun which to fire based on perceived threat level. Humans on their own aren't cutting it, and unconscious biases as well as biological limitations can be solved with computers with override capabilities at some point. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 4, 2022 0:37:33 GMT -8
I don't need to read those articles to know that there's corruption in law enforcement, or that there's a high percentage of police officers and firemen that cheat on their wives, and abuse them. I've known a few of them, unfortunately. From seeing your back and forth in this thread, it appears that you tend to give LEOs the benefit of the doubt. That means you need to read more. Not in all situations. I just happen to not jump to the conclusion that they're all bad, or they're all racist as soon as a scenario like this tragic shooting happens. I like to go case by case. Just because someone is abusive, or cheats on their wife, doesn't mean they're a racist, or murderer. It bothers when some people jump to the conclusion that the cops must be racist if they shoot a black person. It's not that cut and dry. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 4, 2022 0:44:34 GMT -8
From seeing your back and forth in this thread, it appears that you tend to give LEOs the benefit of the doubt. That means you need to read more. I don't even think it's about benefit of the doubt, I think that it's a biological fight or flight response, when it's police officers chasing someone who shot at him. Like from a biological perspective, animals are hardwired to harm and kill anyone who is trying to harm or kill them. Police officers are animals, just like all of us are. These types of issues in police chase gone wrong types of situation will not go away until technology can compensate for hardwired human deficiencies. Like it may be cyborg-esque police officers that have body cameras that can see in infrared, that could actually detect if the person has a gun or not in real time. They could use AI machine learning to (through millions and millions of data points) be able to determine if someone running away and then turning is a threat or is surrendering, something that humans cannot always see in fight or flight mode. That AI could intervene and either prevent the bullet from firing, or perhaps there will be guns that are part taser/part normal gun that can shoot either type of bullet - but the artifical intelligence tells the gun which to fire based on perceived threat level. Humans on their own aren't cutting it, and unconscious biases as well as biological limitations can be solved with computers with override capabilities at some point. Very interesting. Of course, a police officer is going to have the adrenaline going, and he's going to have the thought process that it's him or me if he doesn't surrender, and he makes a false move, especially after being shot at first. You have to assume he has a gun if he's already fired on you, so it becomes a reflex if there's a false move. Him, or me. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Jul 4, 2022 3:29:49 GMT -8
From seeing your back and forth in this thread, it appears that you tend to give LEOs the benefit of the doubt. That means you need to read more. Not in all situations. I just happen to not jump to the conclusion that they're all bad, or they're all racist as soon as a scenario like this tragic shooting happens. I like to go case by case. Just because someone is abusive, or cheats on their wife, doesn't mean they're a racist, or murderer. It bothers when some people jump to the conclusion that the cops must be racist if they shoot a black person. It's not that cut and dry. So you ignore the fact its a systemic issue and instead claim it is one of individual cops? 😂 🤣 It means they're violent authoritative abusers...FYI. being racist is just the added bonus |
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Jul 4, 2022 3:31:59 GMT -8
I don't even think it's about benefit of the doubt, I think that it's a biological fight or flight response, when it's police officers chasing someone who shot at him. Like from a biological perspective, animals are hardwired to harm and kill anyone who is trying to harm or kill them. Police officers are animals, just like all of us are. These types of issues in police chase gone wrong types of situation will not go away until technology can compensate for hardwired human deficiencies. Like it may be cyborg-esque police officers that have body cameras that can see in infrared, that could actually detect if the person has a gun or not in real time. They could use AI machine learning to (through millions and millions of data points) be able to determine if someone running away and then turning is a threat or is surrendering, something that humans cannot always see in fight or flight mode. That AI could intervene and either prevent the bullet from firing, or perhaps there will be guns that are part taser/part normal gun that can shoot either type of bullet - but the artifical intelligence tells the gun which to fire based on perceived threat level. Humans on their own aren't cutting it, and unconscious biases as well as biological limitations can be solved with computers with override capabilities at some point. Very interesting. Of course, a police officer is going to have the adrenaline going, and he's going to have the thought process that it's him or me if he doesn't surrender, and he makes a false move, especially after being shot at first. You have to assume he has a gun if he's already fired on you, so it becomes a reflex if there's a false move. Him, or me. So you're saying is cops should have looser rules of engagement than our military inside a combat zone? |
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Jul 4, 2022 3:38:55 GMT -8
I like how zero conservatives question why modern cops still pay homage to their slave patrol founding thru symbolism & existence
Their badges never changed
|
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Jul 4, 2022 3:47:45 GMT -8
Any cop that discharges their firearm should never be allowed to be a LEO in any jurisdiction in America, ever again. And until cops start policing their own, unfortunately not a single one of them is better than the worst of them - murderers. They signed up for the job, a job that is far less dangerous than many, many others in this country. Its time we started treating them as such. Body cameras should be on at all times, and the footage should be public record in 100% of cases. Cops should be able to be sued in civil court. Criminal cases involving officers should not be handled by the DA and instead should be sent to an outside civilian Ombudsman. Off-duty officers should have no protection under the law that ordinary citizens do not have. Plain clothes and unmarked vehicles should be illegal. No knock raids should be illegal. I can probably keep going. According to fatality stats, being a fisherman is more dangerous than a cop Also the two most common ways cops die on duty by far are traffic accidents and heart attacks. Muricans love their copaganda. It's why Muricans who ironically also claim to love freedom also love cops. No wonder why Goebbels tried to create his Nazi version of Hollywood. He saw the value in entertainment manufacturing consent. Unfortunately, for the Nazi he failed at emulating the best propaganda machine in global history |
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Jul 4, 2022 3:52:18 GMT -8
I would need your definition “known”, and would need to know what proof is available/who is saying “reaches in his waistband”. Regardless, none of my statements above would be changed either way. And unedited body camera footage from the entire interaction that was immediately released to the public, as mentioned above, would tell the most accurate story. Known/convicted of recently, and on the run from it, murder. All officers have body cam footage and theirs witnesses. Would this be a scenario where it would be a justified shooting in your eyes? That time the cops stood outside a school in full body armor for an hour while the shooter was still inside shooting kids |
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Jul 4, 2022 3:54:17 GMT -8
That's some top-notch cognitive dissonance there. That's championship level denial there So now why do Black People have more interactions with cops? Cops being racists or Black People having a higher propensity to commit crimes due to race? Your choice. Choose one Both. Nuance seems to be lacking in these types of discussions. 😂 Thanks for admitting to be racist John too for liking that. nUaNcE = Not agreeing with your BS cop sucking |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 4, 2022 7:26:06 GMT -8
I think you're using a hollow and disingenuous narrative to provide a faulty conclusion. What I said was that these incidents combine both racism and poor training/vetting, not that these any cops specifically were acting in a racist manner. You still haven't been able to produce anything that shows that Jayland Walker acted aggressively, turned towards the officers or did anything that necessitated what ultimately transpired. We have all the evidence we need - There's nothing that justifies what happened. Period. Shooting at someone is pretty goddamn aggressive last time I checked. He shot at them? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 4, 2022 7:33:41 GMT -8
Variable mixture of both. Poor training killed Alfred Olango, for example. I know, I was 50 feet away when it happened. PERT was unavailable and on another call, so officers attempted to deescalate a situation and ended up killing Olango. It's funny how you are now making a nuanced point as an explanation for what the issue is with police officers (poor training vs. racism), yet my nuanced point (for why black people come into contact with law enforcement more often) was dismissed by you. It IS POSSIBLE that black people who are poor, come into contact with police officers more then black people who are wealthy. It IS POSSIBLE that the police officers were poorly trained, or that police training needs to be changed (more then possible - it should be changed). It IS POSSIBLE that police officers have unconscious biases against black people. I remember reading an article about a research study that proved that most people are unconsciously biased (unknowingly biased) against black people. That still doesn't make them murderers, it just makes them human beings who react on a subconscious level to stimuli like other animals do in a high adrenaline, life or death situation (any time that an officer is fired at, that's the mindset that they are going to be in). Again, not nuance. Basic data and research. Things we can actually connect - Whereas poverty has inconsistent links with higher crime rates and is not universally to blame for the circumstances above. You're speaking in hypothetical possibilities that aren't quantified in research - Anything is possible? But we KNOW that police departments have been guilty of abuses, have overstepped their already considerable power and have acted in a racially biased manner. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 4, 2022 7:35:56 GMT -8
Known/convicted of recently, and on the run from it, murder. All officers have body cam footage and theirs witnesses. Would this be a scenario where it would be a justified shooting in your eyes? That time the cops stood outside a school in full body armor for an hour while the shooter was still inside shooting kids I'm sorry, you'll have to be specific. That happened at least twice that I know of. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 4, 2022 7:40:26 GMT -8
So apparently they did try to render aid (wasn't previously aware of that) but it was after he was already handcuffed...and dead.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 4, 2022 9:18:17 GMT -8
Shooting at someone is pretty goddamn aggressive last time I checked. He shot at them? There's a good chance you'll end up finding out that was true, just as you found out that they did render aid. We need all the facts to be sorted out. As of now, it sure looks like he did. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 4, 2022 9:50:19 GMT -8
There's a good chance you'll end up finding out that was true, just as you found out that they did render aid. We need all the facts to be sorted out. As of now, it sure looks like he did. But it doesn't matter if he shot at them or not. All you're doing is using that narrative (again) to justify excessive police action. I'm aware that he fired *a* shot in a general direction from a moving vehicle. Are they heroes for rendering aid after they shot a person twelve times in the head? It does not in any way change what transpired or make the situation better. They are legally required to render aid. It's literally their job. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 4, 2022 11:20:54 GMT -8
There's a good chance you'll end up finding out that was true, just as you found out that they did render aid. We need all the facts to be sorted out. As of now, it sure looks like he did. But it doesn't matter if he shot at them or not. All you're doing is using that narrative (again) to justify excessive police action. I'm aware that he fired *a* shot in a general direction from a moving vehicle. Are they heroes for rendering aid after they shot a person twelve times in the head? It does not in any way change what transpired or make the situation better. They are legally required to render aid. It's literally their job. It absolutely DOES matter if he stopped and, turned to the police officers without his hands up and he had shot at them before. Again, they have to assume he had a weapon after already shooting at them. That's not that difficult to comprehend. As far as the aid required, you had stated that they did not provide ANY aid, which turns out to be false. Definitely not heroes for doing that, but what they're trained to do. I see you highlighted the *a* in *a* shot. Well, *a* shot is enough, and as a matter of fact, if he didn't fire any shots it's still a high alert situation because he has a gun. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 4, 2022 11:29:31 GMT -8
But it doesn't matter if he shot at them or not. All you're doing is using that narrative (again) to justify excessive police action. I'm aware that he fired *a* shot in a general direction from a moving vehicle. Are they heroes for rendering aid after they shot a person twelve times in the head? It does not in any way change what transpired or make the situation better. They are legally required to render aid. It's literally their job. It absolutely DOES matter if he stopped and, turned to the police officers without his hands up and he had shot at them before. Again, they have to assume he had a weapon after already shooting at them. That's not that difficult to comprehend. As far as the aid required, you had stated that they did not provide ANY aid, which turns out to be false. Definitely not heroes for doing that, but what they're trained to do. I see you highlighted the *a* in *a* shot. Well, *a* shot is enough, and as a matter of fact, if he didn't fire any shots it's still a high alert situation because he has a gun. The problem is you're okay with those assumptions, because you put the onus on their safety and not their recklessness firing dozens of shots at someone. I did not state whether they provided aid (I asked if they did, for the record) because the press conference didn't highlight that with any real emphasis that I personally saw. As for the rest of it, like I've said before, you can use whatever narrative you want to justify egregious police overreach. Firing 60+ shots at any one target is excessive and unnecessary. The cruelty of the act is the problem. The double standard of racial bias is the second problem. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 4, 2022 11:56:18 GMT -8
It absolutely DOES matter if he stopped and, turned to the police officers without his hands up and he had shot at them before. Again, they have to assume he had a weapon after already shooting at them. That's not that difficult to comprehend. As far as the aid required, you had stated that they did not provide ANY aid, which turns out to be false. Definitely not heroes for doing that, but what they're trained to do. I see you highlighted the *a* in *a* shot. Well, *a* shot is enough, and as a matter of fact, if he didn't fire any shots it's still a high alert situation because he has a gun. The problem is you're okay with those assumptions, because you put the onus on their safety and not their recklessness firing dozens of shots at someone. I did not state whether they provided aid (I asked if they did, for the record) because the press conference didn't highlight that with any real emphasis that I personally saw. As for the rest of it, like I've said before, you can use whatever narrative you want to justify egregious police overreach. Firing 60+ shots at any one target is excessive and unnecessary. The cruelty of the act is the problem. The double standard of racial bias is the second problem. I agree 60 shots is excessive, and if that's what they're trained to do then they should be re-trained. You also have to consider the amount of adrenaline flowing through them at the time. You and I have no idea. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Jul 4, 2022 12:03:57 GMT -8
It's funny how you are now making a nuanced point as an explanation for what the issue is with police officers (poor training vs. racism), yet my nuanced point (for why black people come into contact with law enforcement more often) was dismissed by you. It IS POSSIBLE that black people who are poor, come into contact with police officers more then black people who are wealthy. It IS POSSIBLE that the police officers were poorly trained, or that police training needs to be changed (more then possible - it should be changed). It IS POSSIBLE that police officers have unconscious biases against black people. I remember reading an article about a research study that proved that most people are unconsciously biased (unknowingly biased) against black people. That still doesn't make them murderers, it just makes them human beings who react on a subconscious level to stimuli like other animals do in a high adrenaline, life or death situation (any time that an officer is fired at, that's the mindset that they are going to be in). Again, not nuance. Basic data and research. Things we can actually connect - Whereas poverty has inconsistent links with higher crime rates and is not universally to blame for the circumstances above. You're speaking in hypothetical possibilities that aren't quantified in research - Anything is possible? But we KNOW that police departments have been guilty of abuses, have overstepped their already considerable power and have acted in a racially biased manner. What are you talking about? The link between poverty and crime has been well documented statistically. I studied datasets that documented it in my statistics courses that I took in undergrad. It's not hypothetical. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Jul 4, 2022 12:06:22 GMT -8
Both. Nuance seems to be lacking in these types of discussions. 😂 Thanks for admitting to be racist John too for liking that. nUaNcE = Not agreeing with your BS cop sucking Study statistics on socioeconomic inequality, poverty and crime rates by race and get back to me. Oh and that's really convenient to call someone racist who doesn't agree with you. |
|
