|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 22 2014 20:50 coverpunch wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2014 19:58 Gorsameth wrote:On December 22 2014 17:36 coverpunch wrote:On December 22 2014 10:04 IgnE wrote:On December 22 2014 08:10 coverpunch wrote:On December 22 2014 05:10 IgnE wrote:On December 21 2014 22:03 coverpunch wrote:On December 21 2014 21:33 Gorsameth wrote:
So there was this discussion about the militarization of the police and how that was a bad thing.
And now that a random nutjob shot 2 police officers their union is talking about being a "war time" police department?
Why the fuck is some wannabe Judge Dredd the face of the police union? More complete version:The New York Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, the NYPD's union, has issued this statement following the deaths of two police officers in an ambush:
"Starting IMMEDIATELY: At least two units are to respond to EVERY call, no matter the condition or severity, no matter what type of job is pending, or what the opinion of the patrol supervisor happens to be.
“IN ADDITION: Absolutely NO enforcement action in the form of arrests and or summonses is to be taken unless absolutely necessary and an individual MUST be placed under arrest.
“These are precautions that were taken in the 1970's when police officers were ambushed and executed on a regular basis.
“The mayor’s hands are literally dripping with our blood because of his words actions and policies and we have, for the first time in a number of years, become a ‘wartime’ police department. We will act accordingly.” With the statement in this context, it's less about militarization per se and more about being more firm and decisive in their actions for the sake of police safety. I'm not sure exactly how the "in addition" part changes their actions day to day, but it's clear they don't want any more dead cops. It's crazy that you would quote the whole thing as if it contextualized "wartime" excerpt. The full quote is just as full-on crazy. De Blasio has blood on his hands??? I think it contextualizes it as an emotional response and their recommendations for actions per se are for cops to be very cautious and only make arrests firmly and decisively. I don't read it as an actual declaration of war, which is how some of the commenters seem to read it. Sure, it's hyperbolic and out there, but I would give them some rope because they're very upset by the nature and premeditation of the attack. This guy killed those two cops for no better reason than they happened to be the first ones he saw. They weren't white, they don't seem to have had reputations for abuse, and neither of them deserves to be dead. So if they had had a reputation for abuse they would have deserved it? Framing it in terms of "reasons" is not intelligible. It used to be that the object of "protect and serve" was the public. It's become increasingly clear that for many police departments their priority has shifted to self-aggrandizement. No, but the police wouldn't have to feel scared that this could happen to any cop on the street. The fact that this was a nut job killing two cops in their car makes it even more scary for all the cops that have to do patrols, particularly in high-crime neighborhoods or near the protesters most likely to be violent. So should their union not be calling for calm and reasoned debate (from both sides) instead of drumming up their members? Putting them more on edge and practically waiting until the next cop shoots someone out of fear and paranoia? No, it shouldn't. The union is not concerned with broader moral questions for society, it exists to serve the interests of its membership. Calm and reasoned debate doesn't make cops any safer when they go out on patrol and it doesn't inform their behavior with regards to the public to best protect themselves. But as for "putting them more on edge", here are the sorts of things other police unions in the Tri-state area are telling their membership: Show nested quote +New Jersey’s state police union has issued an email alert to the group’s 33,000 members warning them to take extra caution after two NYPD officers were murdered.
New Jersey State PBA Executive Vice President Marc Kovar said in the email Sunday morning that all members and officers should take extra caution and change up routines in the coming weeks.
He cites heightened hostility from nationwide protests that he says has led to a “fever pitch of anti-police sentiment.”
“This open hostility has created more tense encounters with officers even on routine incidents such as motor vehicle stops,” the alert reads.
Kovar also advised officers to be vigilant for potential ambushes after two NYPD officers were ambushed and shot to death in Brooklyn Saturday.
As NJ.com reported, the Newark Police Department will take single officer-units off of the streets, according to the union president.
“The Newark Fraternal Order of Police is primarily concerned with the safety of the officers in the street,” James Stewart, the president of the union, said late Saturday. “In the climate we face today there is nothing more important. We are happy the Director agrees with our view and is putting the safety of the men and women in the street above all else.”...
The union says officers should be alert for any interaction where someone may be looking for a confrontation. This is certainly less panicked than the other message from the NYPD union, as they are much more explicit that they are concerned for police safety rather than taking shots at the mayor or using provocative terms like "wartime police", but it has essentially the same message and they're taking the same measures.
Yeah no, he's just a fucking idiot. If you want less dead cops, you probably shouldn't escalate the conflict further by declaring war on the people you're supposed to protect. Also funny how they freely admit that they make a lot of unnecessary arrests (enough to warrant specific mention).
|
On December 23 2014 01:26 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2014 17:26 oneofthem wrote:
now now, both 'sides' are allowed the emotional overreactions. there's a lot to be said on who's right and who's not etc, but the important thing i see is tremendous lost opportunity for honest reflection. Nope sorry there aren't two sides. On one side is a pattern of deadly excessive force by those who are tasked with protecting the public. The other side composed of a lone wolf psycho killer is dead.
The situation in New York is pretty clear cut. Regardless of whether there should have been an indictment, it is fairly clear that the cops handled the situation incredibly badly and generated an unnecessary confrontation. People should be outraged over what happened. Despite all of the shitty rhetoric, there doesn't appear to be any actual actions taken against cops other than this one particular shooting. This doesn't exactly warrant the response from the police that has come out. If there are more shootings and more attacks on cops, then we can revisit the issue.
|
And the above is how one can know that xDaunt is a Republican from California and Colorado, and not the Deep South or the Midwest 
|
On December 23 2014 02:15 farvacola wrote:And the above is how one can know that xDaunt is a Republican from California and Colorado, and not the Deep South or the Midwest
The Eric Garner decision upset my campus's local College Republican club in a similar fashion. It made me appreciate that even people who I disagree with on a lot of things (like Mike Brown, which I think is a lot muddier of a case) still agree that a Black father does not deserve to get choked out just for selling some loose cigarettes.
|
Eight months after a police officer shot and killed a black man whom he had been trying to search as the man slept, Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm says the officer acted in self-defense.
The incident occurred in a Milwaukee park at around 4 in the afternoon. Officer Christopher Manney, who is white, was trying to frisk a sleeping Dontre Hamilton. Manney fired his gun 14 times after Dontre Hamilton woke up and grabbed the officer's baton, striking him with it.
From the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
"This was a tragic incident for the Hamilton family and for the community," Chisholm wrote. "But, based on all the evidence and analysis presented in this report, I come to the conclusion that Officer Manney's use of force in this incident was justified self-defense and that defense cannot be reasonably overcome to establish a basis to charge Officer Manney with a crime."
The announcement comes after months of pressure on Chisholm to make a decision in the case – and a month after the police department fired the officer, Christopher Manney, for violating its procedures in the encounter with Hamilton.
The incident began after workers at a Starbucks kiosk in a park in downtown Milwaukee called in complaints about a man sleeping nearby.
Source
|
On December 22 2014 15:59 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2014 14:26 Sub40APM wrote:
Well just the way it worked out, Citi was able to offer higher rates on 'AAA' SPV securities, when that failed Citi took them back onto its BS and TARP paid for it. It was a too big to fail subsidy. I suppose the other way to skin the cat is to move away from the issuer pays the credit agency to rate its stuff. No more 9% return 'AAA' securities. As for TARP, I think you're missing why TARP and special Fed actions happened. The securities not going to Citi doesn't mean that there isn't a problem and so you'd still need those actions to take place. I guess in the new version TARP money goes to the SPVs, rather than Citi, which benefits Citi anyways so... what's new here?
The issue with baling out the larger banks with TARP, and more specifically their bond holders was to prevent the financial infrastructure from collapsing. If shadow banking experiences a bank run you see an increase in interest rates but you dont see inter-mediation fail. The problem when TBTF banks also start trying to run a separate, higher fee generating shadow banking game is exactly what happened -- they can be more reckless because ultimately they know they act as the economic plumbing and the Fed would never let that fail. I am for the market disciplining people who rush into some obscure SPV out of the Bahams offering 'AAA', but that cant happen while there is an implicit bailout of those people. Hedge funds fail, but you dont see the Fed in general -- outside of LTCM, and that was mostly forcing all of its bank-investors to eat its assets -- organize tax payer bailouts.
In the new version the SPV just die and Citi is explicitly forbidden from giving that soft backing that investors are looking for when they asses the risk/reward of an investment. It means the SPV has to offer higher rates of return and the people who buy into it dont record it on their books as AAA and then are shocked to find their balance sheets full of trash.
|
On December 23 2014 02:15 farvacola wrote:And the above is how one can know that xDaunt is a Republican from California and Colorado, and not the Deep South or the Midwest
Eh, setting younger generations aside, I think the argument can be made that "enlightened" places like the west coast and Northeast are more racist than the South in many regards.
Regardless, I don't think the Garner issue is a racial one so much as it is a demonstration of the kind of asshole that cops can be when given even the slightest provocation. You're going to get your ass beat if you mouth off to a cop regardless of what race you are.
|
Please don't tell me this argument doesn't go something like the Civil War argument about how the South cared deeply for their slaves versus the North who were for their white, institutionalized privilege. "Hated the race and loved the man vs hated the man and loved the race."
|
On December 23 2014 05:40 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2014 15:59 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On December 22 2014 14:26 Sub40APM wrote:
Well just the way it worked out, Citi was able to offer higher rates on 'AAA' SPV securities, when that failed Citi took them back onto its BS and TARP paid for it. It was a too big to fail subsidy. I suppose the other way to skin the cat is to move away from the issuer pays the credit agency to rate its stuff. No more 9% return 'AAA' securities. As for TARP, I think you're missing why TARP and special Fed actions happened. The securities not going to Citi doesn't mean that there isn't a problem and so you'd still need those actions to take place. I guess in the new version TARP money goes to the SPVs, rather than Citi, which benefits Citi anyways so... what's new here? The issue with baling out the larger banks with TARP, and more specifically their bond holders was to prevent the financial infrastructure from collapsing. If shadow banking experiences a bank run you see an increase in interest rates but you dont see inter-mediation fail. The problem when TBTF banks also start trying to run a separate, higher fee generating shadow banking game is exactly what happened -- they can be more reckless because ultimately they know they act as the economic plumbing and the Fed would never let that fail. I am for the market disciplining people who rush into some obscure SPV out of the Bahams offering 'AAA', but that cant happen while there is an implicit bailout of those people. Hedge funds fail, but you dont see the Fed in general -- outside of LTCM, and that was mostly forcing all of its bank-investors to eat its assets -- organize tax payer bailouts. In the new version the SPV just die and Citi is explicitly forbidden from giving that soft backing that investors are looking for when they asses the risk/reward of an investment. It means the SPV has to offer higher rates of return and the people who buy into it dont record it on their books as AAA and then are shocked to find their balance sheets full of trash.
If shadow banking experiences a run, it's just as bad as any other bank run. Liquidity collapses, and that collapse spreads throughout the economy. Pushing out the activities from banks does NOT prevent the run from spreading.
And the run itself is what is important. This isn't about high risk, high return transactions. This about what are essentially deposits. And if a business can't finance its inventory because it cannot access its deposits, you can be damn sure that the crisis will spread.
|
On December 23 2014 03:44 YoureFired wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 02:15 farvacola wrote:And the above is how one can know that xDaunt is a Republican from California and Colorado, and not the Deep South or the Midwest The Eric Garner decision upset my campus's local College Republican club in a similar fashion. It made me appreciate that even people who I disagree with on a lot of things (like Mike Brown, which I think is a lot muddier of a case) still agree that a Black father does not deserve to get choked out just for selling some loose cigarettes.
Just curious, if he had been allegedly selling cannabis, instead of loose cigarettes, if republicans/conservatives would have the same position on Eric Garner and how the police reacted?
Would you "still agree that a Black father does not deserve to get choked out just for selling some cannabis."?
|
On December 23 2014 04:40 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +Eight months after a police officer shot and killed a black man whom he had been trying to search as the man slept, Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm says the officer acted in self-defense.
The incident occurred in a Milwaukee park at around 4 in the afternoon. Officer Christopher Manney, who is white, was trying to frisk a sleeping Dontre Hamilton. Manney fired his gun 14 times after Dontre Hamilton woke up and grabbed the officer's baton, striking him with it.
From the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
"This was a tragic incident for the Hamilton family and for the community," Chisholm wrote. "But, based on all the evidence and analysis presented in this report, I come to the conclusion that Officer Manney's use of force in this incident was justified self-defense and that defense cannot be reasonably overcome to establish a basis to charge Officer Manney with a crime."
The announcement comes after months of pressure on Chisholm to make a decision in the case – and a month after the police department fired the officer, Christopher Manney, for violating its procedures in the encounter with Hamilton.
The incident began after workers at a Starbucks kiosk in a park in downtown Milwaukee called in complaints about a man sleeping nearby. Source
I know he was fired for it but why on earth would he even frisk a sleeping guy instead of you know, poke him and get him to wake up.
Also this is self defense? Again utter BS.
|
I dont think anyone deserves to be choked out for selling almost anything. There might be a few exceptions like bombs, anthrax, candy full of razors or similar things.
|
On December 23 2014 04:40 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +Eight months after a police officer shot and killed a black man whom he had been trying to search as the man slept, Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm says the officer acted in self-defense.
The incident occurred in a Milwaukee park at around 4 in the afternoon. Officer Christopher Manney, who is white, was trying to frisk a sleeping Dontre Hamilton. Manney fired his gun 14 times after Dontre Hamilton woke up and grabbed the officer's baton, striking him with it.
From the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
"This was a tragic incident for the Hamilton family and for the community," Chisholm wrote. "But, based on all the evidence and analysis presented in this report, I come to the conclusion that Officer Manney's use of force in this incident was justified self-defense and that defense cannot be reasonably overcome to establish a basis to charge Officer Manney with a crime."
The announcement comes after months of pressure on Chisholm to make a decision in the case – and a month after the police department fired the officer, Christopher Manney, for violating its procedures in the encounter with Hamilton.
The incident began after workers at a Starbucks kiosk in a park in downtown Milwaukee called in complaints about a man sleeping nearby. Source
I wasn't there and this is just my reaction to the information in the post, but that judge is an idiot. If I was sleeping and was woken up by some dude frisking me, I wouldn't take kindly to it either.
14 shots? Self defense is not 14 shots, self defense is a warning shot to get the dude to back off. That's bullshit.
|
On December 23 2014 08:14 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 04:40 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Eight months after a police officer shot and killed a black man whom he had been trying to search as the man slept, Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm says the officer acted in self-defense.
The incident occurred in a Milwaukee park at around 4 in the afternoon. Officer Christopher Manney, who is white, was trying to frisk a sleeping Dontre Hamilton. Manney fired his gun 14 times after Dontre Hamilton woke up and grabbed the officer's baton, striking him with it.
From the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
"This was a tragic incident for the Hamilton family and for the community," Chisholm wrote. "But, based on all the evidence and analysis presented in this report, I come to the conclusion that Officer Manney's use of force in this incident was justified self-defense and that defense cannot be reasonably overcome to establish a basis to charge Officer Manney with a crime."
The announcement comes after months of pressure on Chisholm to make a decision in the case – and a month after the police department fired the officer, Christopher Manney, for violating its procedures in the encounter with Hamilton.
The incident began after workers at a Starbucks kiosk in a park in downtown Milwaukee called in complaints about a man sleeping nearby. Source I wasn't there and this is just my reaction to the information in the post, but that judge is an idiot. If I was sleeping and was woken up by some dude frisking me, I wouldn't take kindly to it either. 14 shots? Self defense is not 14 shots, self defense is a warning shot to get the dude to back off. That's bullshit.
Warning shots are not a thing with handguns, stop basing your assumptions off of tv.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On December 23 2014 01:26 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2014 17:26 oneofthem wrote:
now now, both 'sides' are allowed the emotional overreactions. there's a lot to be said on who's right and who's not etc, but the important thing i see is tremendous lost opportunity for honest reflection. Nope sorry there aren't two sides. On one side is a pattern of deadly excessive force by those who are tasked with protecting the public. The other side composed of a lone wolf psycho killer is dead.
again, two sides simply mean two sides to a conversation, not two sides of blameworthiness. protests for the most part do nothing wrong per se, but are also not at their most productive. the police doesn't listen when you scream at them, this much should be simple.
there is no chance of reform at this rate. enjoy the escalations. whether talking with police or with kids establishing trust is the first step of a productive conversation. i'm not seeing that right now
|
On December 23 2014 07:50 Simberto wrote:
I dont think anyone deserves to be choked out for selling almost anything. There might be a few exceptions like bombs, anthrax, candy full of razors or similar things.
There is an irony in none of those things killing anywhere close to as many people as cigarettes. Yet how different it would be perceived if the guy was selling something like crack.
|
Nobody deserves to be choked to death, regardless what s/he is selling.
Police brutality is a problem, and it needs to be solved quickly.
Declaring a wartime against the protesters isnt helping
|
On December 23 2014 08:14 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 04:40 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Eight months after a police officer shot and killed a black man whom he had been trying to search as the man slept, Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm says the officer acted in self-defense.
The incident occurred in a Milwaukee park at around 4 in the afternoon. Officer Christopher Manney, who is white, was trying to frisk a sleeping Dontre Hamilton. Manney fired his gun 14 times after Dontre Hamilton woke up and grabbed the officer's baton, striking him with it.
From the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
"This was a tragic incident for the Hamilton family and for the community," Chisholm wrote. "But, based on all the evidence and analysis presented in this report, I come to the conclusion that Officer Manney's use of force in this incident was justified self-defense and that defense cannot be reasonably overcome to establish a basis to charge Officer Manney with a crime."
The announcement comes after months of pressure on Chisholm to make a decision in the case – and a month after the police department fired the officer, Christopher Manney, for violating its procedures in the encounter with Hamilton.
The incident began after workers at a Starbucks kiosk in a park in downtown Milwaukee called in complaints about a man sleeping nearby. Source I wasn't there and this is just my reaction to the information in the post, but that judge is an idiot. If I was sleeping and was woken up by some dude frisking me, I wouldn't take kindly to it either. 14 shots? Self defense is not 14 shots, self defense is a warning shot to get the dude to back off. That's bullshit.
Judges aren't idiots. He's just applying the law. There's a difference between doing something that is stupid and doing something that is criminally stupid. Attacking a police officer with a weapon is very likely going to get you shot and the officer is going to be protected criminally under self-defense rules.
|
Why wasn't the officers baton properly secured?
From what I know of the homeless; if they wake up and find someone going through their clothes, they're probably being robbed; so it would seem unwise to frisk someone while they're asleep unless you have the physical force to guarantee they won't be a threat if they wake up violent (and confused).
It seems like one of those cases where it may be that neither side is at fault.
hmm; if the officer violated procedure in doing it; I think you may be able to make a case for criminally negligent homicide (on the theory that the criminal act was at the frisking while the guy was asleep, and the homicide a foreseeable outcome; self-defense wouldn't apply because the criminal act of negligence occurred before self-defense was an issue, because the guy was asleep).
It'd be hard to win, but it sounds like a plausible case to try.
|
On December 23 2014 08:21 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 01:26 IgnE wrote:On December 22 2014 17:26 oneofthem wrote:
now now, both 'sides' are allowed the emotional overreactions. there's a lot to be said on who's right and who's not etc, but the important thing i see is tremendous lost opportunity for honest reflection. Nope sorry there aren't two sides. On one side is a pattern of deadly excessive force by those who are tasked with protecting the public. The other side composed of a lone wolf psycho killer is dead. again, two sides simply mean two sides to a conversation, not two sides of blameworthiness. protests for the most part do nothing wrong per se, but are also not at their most productive. the police doesn't listen when you scream at them, this much should be simple. there is no chance of reform at this rate. enjoy the escalations. whether talking with police or with kids establishing trust is the first step of a productive conversation. i'm not seeing that right now
the cops reacting in this way is just more of the same from them. cop lives are more important than everyone else's. stop the presses: a cop got shot. its the end of the world.
if anybody else had been shot its just another tragedy. perhaps we need to cast out the entire leadership in most precincts wholesale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
