|
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 October 25 2015 11:28 Kickstart wrote:
Yeah this line of thought is absurd. Surely the problem is the fact that the police are abusing their power, not that people are catching them doing it on video. Like what the fuck who says that.
'Everything is fine until the public at large knows what is actually going on and gets to see it'.
Just shows how much the people in power love transparency /s
I mean, its been kind of obvious whats been going on people just didn't want to think about it. Now that this shit gets caught on video and we see how disgusting things are people are demanding something be done about it. How dare he say 'police are now scared to do their job'. Their job is no more dangerous than it has always been, violent crime is down from what it was not that long ago, only thing more dangerous for them is that if they act like bullies with a badge they are more likely to get videotaped and have everyone see it.
Privately created Youtube videos of police can be scary for police even when they are in the right. The creator can start and stop it at just the right time to show the "abuse" while cutting off what led up to it and what the perpetrator does afterwards.
That's why all police need body cameras. It will show the whole story and protect them if they're in the right. If the police are afraid of the whole story being told, then that's a good reason to have body cameras too.
|
On October 25 2015 11:37 Kickstart wrote:
Still don't buy the idea that Sanders has a better shot than Hillary to actually win. I mean I agree with him more on issues and I despise the Clinton's for being the sociopaths they are (her and her husband) but Hillary just has a better shot at winning the election and it's going to take a lot of work to change that.
Not to mention Hillary had the best week ever as a candidate. Killed the debate, looked even better in the Benghazi hearing, and Biden dropped out. Her poll numbers shot up post debate, and we haven't registered the Biden and Benghazi bumps yet.
|
On October 25 2015 11:52 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 11:28 Kickstart wrote:
Yeah this line of thought is absurd. Surely the problem is the fact that the police are abusing their power, not that people are catching them doing it on video. Like what the fuck who says that.
'Everything is fine until the public at large knows what is actually going on and gets to see it'.
Just shows how much the people in power love transparency /s
I mean, its been kind of obvious whats been going on people just didn't want to think about it. Now that this shit gets caught on video and we see how disgusting things are people are demanding something be done about it. How dare he say 'police are now scared to do their job'. Their job is no more dangerous than it has always been, violent crime is down from what it was not that long ago, only thing more dangerous for them is that if they act like bullies with a badge they are more likely to get videotaped and have everyone see it. Privately created Youtube videos of police can be scary for police even when they are in the right. The creator can start and stop it at just the right time to show the "abuse" while cutting off what led up to it and what the perpetrator does afterwards. That's why all police need body cameras. It will show the whole story and protect them if they're in the right. If the police are afraid of the whole story being told, then that's a good reason to have body cameras too.
Agreed. But the argument shouldn't be for less transparency like these types are implying, it should be for more (body cameras like you say).
On October 25 2015 12:17 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 11:37 Kickstart wrote:
Still don't buy the idea that Sanders has a better shot than Hillary to actually win. I mean I agree with him more on issues and I despise the Clinton's for being the sociopaths they are (her and her husband) but Hillary just has a better shot at winning the election and it's going to take a lot of work to change that. Not to mention Hillary had the best week ever as a candidate. Killed the debate, looked even better in the Benghazi hearing, and Biden dropped out. Her poll numbers shot up post debate, and we haven't registered the Biden and Benghazi bumps yet.
Yep. I just think Hillary has a better chance of winning, even if I don't personally like her the most. But then I think if the Republicans cared about winning they would put up Jeb Bush, but they live in this world where they think like people like Trump and Carson actually have any shot at becoming president *shrug*. Hillary would beat Jeb anyways but still. While I do like Bernie, I just can't help but view him and his supporters like how I viewed Ron Paul and his supporters.
edit: look we even have them making the same arguments about poll numbers that RP supporters did xD. The similarities are eerie, anyone else think so or is it just me?
|
On October 25 2015 12:17 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 11:37 Kickstart wrote:
Still don't buy the idea that Sanders has a better shot than Hillary to actually win. I mean I agree with him more on issues and I despise the Clinton's for being the sociopaths they are (her and her husband) but Hillary just has a better shot at winning the election and it's going to take a lot of work to change that. Not to mention Hillary had the best week ever as a candidate. Killed the debate, looked even better in the Benghazi hearing, and Biden dropped out. Her poll numbers shot up post debate, and we haven't registered the Biden and Benghazi bumps yet.
lol her numbers didn't shoot up after the debates. One poll showed a big change in Iowa and every corporate media outlet pushed it. People dove into the particulars and showed that poll had some obvious problems. Then more polls came out and showed it was a fluke, but the propaganda had already spread.
Good chance Sanders out raises Hillary this quarter too. He's certainly spending a hell of a lot less. I have a feeling democratic pollsters propping up Hillary are going to look a lot like Karl Rove when the votes start coming in.
|
Except the Democratic pollsters aren't making shit up. Romney and hard-right pollsters had him as competitive or winning, but the centrist and liberal pollsters called the race as it really was. Look at the polling methodology used by the various groups in the RCP Polling Aggregator.
You can also take a look at the 538 analysis of the post-debate happenings.
The negative media cycle for Clinton is pretty much over. Now we can go back to our regular scheduled programming...
|
On October 25 2015 12:25 ticklishmusic wrote:Except the Democratic pollsters aren't making shit up. Romney and hard-right pollsters had him as competitive or winning, but the centrist and liberal pollsters called the race as it really was. Look at the polling methodology used by the various groups in the RCP Polling Aggregator. You can also take a look at the 538 analysis of the post-debate happenings.
I don't mean to say they are "making it up", Just that the polls aren't properly accounting for the electorate that's going to come out.
|
On October 25 2015 11:28 Kickstart wrote:
Yeah this line of thought is absurd. Surely the problem is the fact that the police are abusing their power, not that people are catching them doing it on video. Like what the fuck who says that.
'Everything is fine until the public at large knows what is actually going on and gets to see it'.
Just shows how much the people in power love transparency /s
The actually line of reasoning is that anything can be twisted to be used against you if put in the spotlight. It's really not hard to make someone look like the bad guy with a properly edited video.
Add to that the fact that many people act openly hostile and intentionally antagonize the police to get a reaction, and you have a situation like this.
Not to mention this is exactly what everyone asked for. Cops are less likely to stop you on the street now, and you don't have to worry about being harassed by them. Isn't that great?
|
On October 25 2015 12:43 killa_robot wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 11:28 Kickstart wrote:
Yeah this line of thought is absurd. Surely the problem is the fact that the police are abusing their power, not that people are catching them doing it on video. Like what the fuck who says that.
'Everything is fine until the public at large knows what is actually going on and gets to see it'.
Just shows how much the people in power love transparency /s The actually line of reasoning is that anything can be twisted to be used against you if put in the spotlight. It's really not hard to make someone look like the bad guy with a properly edited video. Add to that the fact that many people act openly hostile and intentionally antagonize the police to get a reaction, and you have a situation like this. Not to mention this is exactly what everyone asked for. Cops are less likely to stop you on the street now, and you don't have to worry about being harassed by them. Isn't that great?
If it is unwarranted yes it is great.
Not that it justifies people doing it to cops, but there have been plenty of instances of cops just making shit up and of course people believe them because they are cops. I have little sympathy on this issue, if you don't want videos to be edited in this way, then put body cams on cops like should have been done already. I refuse to listen to anyone who says 'since there are some negatives to this videotaping cops thing people shouldn't do it at all', get real.
|
On October 25 2015 12:59 Kickstart wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 12:43 killa_robot wrote:On October 25 2015 11:28 Kickstart wrote:
Yeah this line of thought is absurd. Surely the problem is the fact that the police are abusing their power, not that people are catching them doing it on video. Like what the fuck who says that.
'Everything is fine until the public at large knows what is actually going on and gets to see it'.
Just shows how much the people in power love transparency /s The actually line of reasoning is that anything can be twisted to be used against you if put in the spotlight. It's really not hard to make someone look like the bad guy with a properly edited video. Add to that the fact that many people act openly hostile and intentionally antagonize the police to get a reaction, and you have a situation like this. Not to mention this is exactly what everyone asked for. Cops are less likely to stop you on the street now, and you don't have to worry about being harassed by them. Isn't that great? If it is unwarranted yes it is great. Not that it justifies people doing it to cops, but there have been plenty of instances of cops just making shit up and of course people believe them because they are cops. I have little sympathy on this issue, if you don't want videos to be edited in this way, then put body cams on cops like should have been done already. I refuse to listen to anyone who says 'since there are some negatives to this videotaping cops thing people shouldn't do it at all', get real.
I'm all for body cams (police in Toronto have really taken to them so far), but random people filming to spin their own narrative is dangerous.
"Unwarranted stopping" isn't a real thing. If cops want to stop people who they think are suspicious they need to be able to. It's unreasonable to expect cops to know who is a potential criminal and who isn't before they interact with them.
|
On October 25 2015 13:26 killa_robot wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 12:59 Kickstart wrote:On October 25 2015 12:43 killa_robot wrote:On October 25 2015 11:28 Kickstart wrote:
Yeah this line of thought is absurd. Surely the problem is the fact that the police are abusing their power, not that people are catching them doing it on video. Like what the fuck who says that.
'Everything is fine until the public at large knows what is actually going on and gets to see it'.
Just shows how much the people in power love transparency /s The actually line of reasoning is that anything can be twisted to be used against you if put in the spotlight. It's really not hard to make someone look like the bad guy with a properly edited video. Add to that the fact that many people act openly hostile and intentionally antagonize the police to get a reaction, and you have a situation like this. Not to mention this is exactly what everyone asked for. Cops are less likely to stop you on the street now, and you don't have to worry about being harassed by them. Isn't that great? If it is unwarranted yes it is great. Not that it justifies people doing it to cops, but there have been plenty of instances of cops just making shit up and of course people believe them because they are cops. I have little sympathy on this issue, if you don't want videos to be edited in this way, then put body cams on cops like should have been done already. I refuse to listen to anyone who says 'since there are some negatives to this videotaping cops thing people shouldn't do it at all', get real. I'm all for body cams (police in Toronto have really taken to them so far), but random people filming to spin their own narrative is dangerous. "Unwarranted stopping" isn't a real thing. If cops want to stop people who they think are suspicious they need to be able to. It's unreasonable to expect cops to know who is a potential criminal and who isn't before they interact with them.
This line of thought just leads to 'why not stop everybody because then we know they aren't criminals". Cops are allowed to stop with reasonable cause. Saying that unwarranted stopping isn't a real thing is just ignoring the facts, ever hear of things like stop and frisk? Just because cops do it doesn't make it right or legal.
Then add on top of all this that some towns are using cops to make a profit for them and you make matters worse.
|
On October 25 2015 13:32 Kickstart wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 13:26 killa_robot wrote:On October 25 2015 12:59 Kickstart wrote:On October 25 2015 12:43 killa_robot wrote:On October 25 2015 11:28 Kickstart wrote:
Yeah this line of thought is absurd. Surely the problem is the fact that the police are abusing their power, not that people are catching them doing it on video. Like what the fuck who says that.
'Everything is fine until the public at large knows what is actually going on and gets to see it'.
Just shows how much the people in power love transparency /s The actually line of reasoning is that anything can be twisted to be used against you if put in the spotlight. It's really not hard to make someone look like the bad guy with a properly edited video. Add to that the fact that many people act openly hostile and intentionally antagonize the police to get a reaction, and you have a situation like this. Not to mention this is exactly what everyone asked for. Cops are less likely to stop you on the street now, and you don't have to worry about being harassed by them. Isn't that great? If it is unwarranted yes it is great. Not that it justifies people doing it to cops, but there have been plenty of instances of cops just making shit up and of course people believe them because they are cops. I have little sympathy on this issue, if you don't want videos to be edited in this way, then put body cams on cops like should have been done already. I refuse to listen to anyone who says 'since there are some negatives to this videotaping cops thing people shouldn't do it at all', get real. I'm all for body cams (police in Toronto have really taken to them so far), but random people filming to spin their own narrative is dangerous. "Unwarranted stopping" isn't a real thing. If cops want to stop people who they think are suspicious they need to be able to. It's unreasonable to expect cops to know who is a potential criminal and who isn't before they interact with them. This line of thought just leads to 'why not stop everybody because then we know they aren't criminals". Cops are allowed to stop with reasonable cause. Saying that unwarranted stopping isn't a real thing is just ignoring the facts, ever hear of things like stop and frisk? Just because cops do it doesn't make it right or legal. Then add on top of all this that some towns are using cops to make a profit for them and you make matters worse.
Suit yourself. Enjoy your rising crime rates and rest easy knowing that your right to have a cop not interact with you unless they absolutely to is being respected.
|
On October 25 2015 13:39 killa_robot wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 13:32 Kickstart wrote:On October 25 2015 13:26 killa_robot wrote:On October 25 2015 12:59 Kickstart wrote:On October 25 2015 12:43 killa_robot wrote:On October 25 2015 11:28 Kickstart wrote:
Yeah this line of thought is absurd. Surely the problem is the fact that the police are abusing their power, not that people are catching them doing it on video. Like what the fuck who says that.
'Everything is fine until the public at large knows what is actually going on and gets to see it'.
Just shows how much the people in power love transparency /s The actually line of reasoning is that anything can be twisted to be used against you if put in the spotlight. It's really not hard to make someone look like the bad guy with a properly edited video. Add to that the fact that many people act openly hostile and intentionally antagonize the police to get a reaction, and you have a situation like this. Not to mention this is exactly what everyone asked for. Cops are less likely to stop you on the street now, and you don't have to worry about being harassed by them. Isn't that great? If it is unwarranted yes it is great. Not that it justifies people doing it to cops, but there have been plenty of instances of cops just making shit up and of course people believe them because they are cops. I have little sympathy on this issue, if you don't want videos to be edited in this way, then put body cams on cops like should have been done already. I refuse to listen to anyone who says 'since there are some negatives to this videotaping cops thing people shouldn't do it at all', get real. I'm all for body cams (police in Toronto have really taken to them so far), but random people filming to spin their own narrative is dangerous. "Unwarranted stopping" isn't a real thing. If cops want to stop people who they think are suspicious they need to be able to. It's unreasonable to expect cops to know who is a potential criminal and who isn't before they interact with them. This line of thought just leads to 'why not stop everybody because then we know they aren't criminals". Cops are allowed to stop with reasonable cause. Saying that unwarranted stopping isn't a real thing is just ignoring the facts, ever hear of things like stop and frisk? Just because cops do it doesn't make it right or legal. Then add on top of all this that some towns are using cops to make a profit for them and you make matters worse. Suit yourself. Enjoy your rising crime rates and rest easy knowing that your right to have a cop not interact with you unless they absolutely to is being respected.
Cops have no reason to interact with me, I am a law abiding citizen. They should spend their time stopping actual crimes instead of 'interacting' with me. I mean, if your idea of a perfect cop-citizen relationship is a police state then that is fine, but don't act like those of us who want no such thing are being extreme.
I am all for police when the system is working right, but at the moment, in several instances, it isn't.
|
killa -> there's a subissue here where you said: "Unwarranted stopping" isn't a real thing.
when it in fact is, and there is substantial jurisprudence on the issue.
thus you were flat out wrong on that point, while not realizing that you were, and this lead to some of the further discussion.
|
On October 25 2015 13:42 Kickstart wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 13:39 killa_robot wrote:On October 25 2015 13:32 Kickstart wrote:On October 25 2015 13:26 killa_robot wrote:On October 25 2015 12:59 Kickstart wrote:On October 25 2015 12:43 killa_robot wrote:On October 25 2015 11:28 Kickstart wrote:
Yeah this line of thought is absurd. Surely the problem is the fact that the police are abusing their power, not that people are catching them doing it on video. Like what the fuck who says that.
'Everything is fine until the public at large knows what is actually going on and gets to see it'.
Just shows how much the people in power love transparency /s The actually line of reasoning is that anything can be twisted to be used against you if put in the spotlight. It's really not hard to make someone look like the bad guy with a properly edited video. Add to that the fact that many people act openly hostile and intentionally antagonize the police to get a reaction, and you have a situation like this. Not to mention this is exactly what everyone asked for. Cops are less likely to stop you on the street now, and you don't have to worry about being harassed by them. Isn't that great? If it is unwarranted yes it is great. Not that it justifies people doing it to cops, but there have been plenty of instances of cops just making shit up and of course people believe them because they are cops. I have little sympathy on this issue, if you don't want videos to be edited in this way, then put body cams on cops like should have been done already. I refuse to listen to anyone who says 'since there are some negatives to this videotaping cops thing people shouldn't do it at all', get real. I'm all for body cams (police in Toronto have really taken to them so far), but random people filming to spin their own narrative is dangerous. "Unwarranted stopping" isn't a real thing. If cops want to stop people who they think are suspicious they need to be able to. It's unreasonable to expect cops to know who is a potential criminal and who isn't before they interact with them. This line of thought just leads to 'why not stop everybody because then we know they aren't criminals". Cops are allowed to stop with reasonable cause. Saying that unwarranted stopping isn't a real thing is just ignoring the facts, ever hear of things like stop and frisk? Just because cops do it doesn't make it right or legal. Then add on top of all this that some towns are using cops to make a profit for them and you make matters worse. Suit yourself. Enjoy your rising crime rates and rest easy knowing that your right to have a cop not interact with you unless they absolutely to is being respected. Cops have no reason to interact with me, I am a law abiding citizen. They should spend their time stopping actual crimes instead of 'interacting' with me. I mean, if your idea of a perfect cop-citizen relationship is a police state then that is fine, but don't act like those of us who want no such thing are being extreme. I am all for police when the system is working right, but at the moment, in several instances, it isn't.
It's rather sad that you think a cop talking to you makes it a police state. You have a pretty deep seeded mistrust of them, don't you? What exactly would be a working system then?
On October 25 2015 13:45 zlefin wrote:
killa -> there's a subissue here where you said: "Unwarranted stopping" isn't a real thing.
when it in fact is, and there is substantial jurisprudence on the issue.
thus you were flat out wrong on that point, while not realizing that you were, and this lead to some of the further discussion.
Alright, give me a situation when it's a thing. Aside from cops stopping you just to fuck with you, the only time they would be wasting their time with such a thing is if they found you suspicious, which would make it warranted.
|
I don't mind if they talk to me. I said it is a waste of time as far as stopping crime goes. And them talking to me doesn't make things a police state, now you are just grasping, but you are wrong on several points as has been pointed out.
|
On October 25 2015 12:41 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 12:25 ticklishmusic wrote:Except the Democratic pollsters aren't making shit up. Romney and hard-right pollsters had him as competitive or winning, but the centrist and liberal pollsters called the race as it really was. Look at the polling methodology used by the various groups in the RCP Polling Aggregator. You can also take a look at the 538 analysis of the post-debate happenings. I don't mean to say they are "making it up", Just that the polls aren't properly accounting for the electorate that's going to come out.
That's a fair assessment; I think the reality is somewhere between polling and where you believe things to stand.
|
|
|
In a case like that hes just going to say 'but they caught a badguy and he gets off on a technicality', meanwhile ignoring the number of other people who have to submit to warrant-less searches who happen to be doing nothing wrong and are law abiding citizens.
|
On October 25 2015 14:19 Kickstart wrote:
In a case like that hes just going to say 'but they caught a badguy and he gets off on a technicality', meanwhile ignoring the number of other people who have to submit to warrant-less searches who happen to be doing nothing wrong and are law abiding citizens.
no need for this; let's wait for him to respond first, instead of assuming how he'll respond.
|
Well of course now he won't say that. But it isn't hard to guess what would have been said. And I don't see how that was out of line or anything.
He seems to think warrant-less searches aren't a real thing and that cops should just be able to do whatever they want, despite what our constitution has to say on the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
