|
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 June 17 2017 05:27 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 05:21 Trainrunnef wrote:On June 17 2017 04:39 Plansix wrote:The parallels to the tech industry and the robber barons of the late 19th century grow by the day. Especially the “you know what you are getting into” attitude. Tesla not wanting its workers to unionize and other complaints. Uber existing. Facebook and Google doing anything to avoid hiring humans to moderate their websites. The unregulated, free spirited, scrappy, innovative upstarts taking on the world got rich and now they can’t understand why they should have to play by the same rules. On June 17 2017 04:35 KwarK wrote:On June 17 2017 04:30 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 04:06 Mohdoo wrote:On June 17 2017 04:02 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 03:54 Mohdoo wrote:On June 17 2017 03:21 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 03:00 Gahlo wrote:
[quote]
Not surprising. Amazon has been planning on rolling out their grocery stores for a while now, Whole Foods that a good name in areas with money, and good locations.
Just gives me more reason to not buy from Whole Foods, because fuck Amazon. The Walmart v Amazon war continues. Both want the others market. Amazon has an insane amount of cultural advantage though. Amazon is a company people would feel encouraged to test out. I generally agree with Amazon's perspective on how they can improve my life and add value. Walmart is like every single thing wrong with our country. I go out of my way to not interact with Walmart. Yes and you are clearly part of the demographic that Walmart wants, while Amazon wants to break into Walmarts hold over low income markets.
I am also not super exciting about Amazon’s pushes into all areas of the economy. I use their services, but I keep reading not great things about retail market nationwide. And the supply change for retail is a big part of our economy and tax base for states. I wonder if Amazon’s success will continue once the states have to start looking for other ways to pull in tax revenue. Kinda same deal as coal. The way I see it: If this is happening eventually anyway, let's just go ahead and rip the band aid off so we can deal with the problems sooner. We don't help ourselves by having pity on retail workers because their doom is already certain. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/04/the-silent-crisis-of-retail-employment/523428/How every NeoLiberal of you, no pity for people who lose jobs and there is nothing to replace them. And we wonder why Hillary lost.  It is a much larger market. 100K jobs were lost in 6 months, which is the entire coal and steel industry in the US. I don’t think it is a disaster, but the “let the free market churn” style of economics might lead to many more sections of the country feeling left behind and ignored. I have no problem with change in economic realities, but they need to be managed. But the new coal mine Trump was bragging about is going to employ 70 people! Its ok, through the magic of positive thinking, Trump will get the economy to 5%. And we will do this by mandating 10 hour work days, 6 day work weeks and push the retirement age to 75. And all millennials must have at least 2 children after 1 year of marriage. I thought they were the anti-marriage generation... maybe we need to mandate that too. I saw two sets of think pieces on millennials side by side. Set one: Millennials don’t care about sex Millennials are only into casual sex, not long term relationships. Set two: Millennials are not into eating out Millennials don’t cook. So as far as I can tell, Millennials are mythical creatures that don’t eat food and have relationships in ways we cannot comprehend. And are also killing Applebees.
Crazy thought.
Maybe millennials don't do half the stuff previous generations did because millennials can't afford anything because a living wage is a taboo in this country. Yeah they're throwing off some of the shackles and institutions of old because those institutions are a crock of shit and new generations tend to do that sort of thing. But maybe people also don't get married if they can't afford a marriage. Maybe they don't buy a house and a new car every 3 years if they can't afford to even rent an apartment. Maybe they don't pump out children because they can't afford such extravagant things as food or diapers while also having debt up to their eyeballs from college. Maybe they're jaded on capitalism because they've seen capitalism is trying to take them down.
The Right often bemoans these institutions dying off. People aren't getting married and having kids! This is horrible, the Nuclear family is dead! They're not consuming like we want to! But the last thing these same people want to do is pay someone anything approaching a living wage. Well, turns out you get what you pay for I suppose.
|
On June 17 2017 05:48 Sbrubbles wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 05:27 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 05:21 Trainrunnef wrote:On June 17 2017 04:39 Plansix wrote:The parallels to the tech industry and the robber barons of the late 19th century grow by the day. Especially the “you know what you are getting into” attitude. Tesla not wanting its workers to unionize and other complaints. Uber existing. Facebook and Google doing anything to avoid hiring humans to moderate their websites. The unregulated, free spirited, scrappy, innovative upstarts taking on the world got rich and now they can’t understand why they should have to play by the same rules. On June 17 2017 04:35 KwarK wrote:On June 17 2017 04:30 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 04:06 Mohdoo wrote:On June 17 2017 04:02 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 03:54 Mohdoo wrote:On June 17 2017 03:21 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
The Walmart v Amazon war continues. Both want the others market. Amazon has an insane amount of cultural advantage though. Amazon is a company people would feel encouraged to test out. I generally agree with Amazon's perspective on how they can improve my life and add value. Walmart is like every single thing wrong with our country. I go out of my way to not interact with Walmart. Yes and you are clearly part of the demographic that Walmart wants, while Amazon wants to break into Walmarts hold over low income markets.
I am also not super exciting about Amazon’s pushes into all areas of the economy. I use their services, but I keep reading not great things about retail market nationwide. And the supply change for retail is a big part of our economy and tax base for states. I wonder if Amazon’s success will continue once the states have to start looking for other ways to pull in tax revenue. Kinda same deal as coal. The way I see it: If this is happening eventually anyway, let's just go ahead and rip the band aid off so we can deal with the problems sooner. We don't help ourselves by having pity on retail workers because their doom is already certain. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/04/the-silent-crisis-of-retail-employment/523428/How every NeoLiberal of you, no pity for people who lose jobs and there is nothing to replace them. And we wonder why Hillary lost. It is a much larger market. 100K jobs were lost in 6 months, which is the entire coal and steel industry in the US. I don’t think it is a disaster, but the “let the free market churn” style of economics might lead to many more sections of the country feeling left behind and ignored. I have no problem with change in economic realities, but they need to be managed. But the new coal mine Trump was bragging about is going to employ 70 people! Its ok, through the magic of positive thinking, Trump will get the economy to 5%. And we will do this by mandating 10 hour work days, 6 day work weeks and push the retirement age to 75. And all millennials must have at least 2 children after 1 year of marriage. I thought they were the anti-marriage generation... maybe we need to mandate that too. I saw two sets of think pieces on millennials side by side. Set one: Millennials don’t care about sex Millennials are only into casual sex, not long term relationships. Set two: Millennials are not into eating out Millennials don’t cook. So as far as I can tell, Millennials are mythical creatures that don’t eat food and have relationships in ways we cannot comprehend. And are also killing Applebees. If millennials don't cook, how come the kale industry is thriving? Checkmate.
As long as you all kill Applebees, I don’t care what seaweed you fry or whatever you people do.
|
On June 17 2017 05:30 KwarK wrote:
We'd have houses if it were not for avacado toast and healthcare were it not for iphones.
But seriously, millennials as a group don't make sense, it's not a group that really exists beyond old people complaining about anyone younger than them.
There's some commonalities. First generation to really be hit by the 'digital economy' with both positive and negative efffects that it brings, significantly more liberal than both older and younger generations, Grown up in the 'Fukuyama years' and so forth.
|
On June 17 2017 06:10 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 05:30 KwarK wrote:
We'd have houses if it were not for avacado toast and healthcare were it not for iphones.
But seriously, millennials as a group don't make sense, it's not a group that really exists beyond old people complaining about anyone younger than them. There's some commonalities. First generation to really be hit by the 'digital economy' with both positive and negative efffects that it brings, significantly more liberal than both older and younger generations, Grown up in the 'Fukuyama years' and so forth.
He is making a joke about think pieces written by bad internet publications and GOP reps who don’t understand the cost of healthcare. Both of those statements were made about the mythic millennial being unable to afford healthcare or save for a house.
|
On June 17 2017 05:39 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +Miami (CNN)President Donald Trump slammed former President Barack Obama's dealings with the communist regime in Cuba on Friday in Miami, charting his own course of more confrontational relations with the Castro-led government.
The speech, which came as the President signed a directive outlining his posture toward Cuba, is the latest attempt by the Trump administration to chip away at Obama's legacy. Obama spent the last two years of his presidency looking to warm relations with Cuba, including a trip to the island in 2016.
"I am canceling the last administration's completely one-sided deal with Cuba," Trump said.
Casting the Obama administration as people who looked the other way on the Castro regime's human rights violations, Trump said that he, as President, will "expose the crimes of the Castro regime."
"They made a deal with a government that spread violence and instability in the region and nothing they got, think about it, nothing they got, they fought for everything and we just didn't fight hard enough, but now, those days are over," Trump said. "We now hold the cards. The previous administration's easing of restrictions of travel and trade does not help the Cuban people. They only enrich the Cuban regime."
Trump listed some of the Castro regime's anti-United States actions, ranging back to the Cuban Missile Crisis, and added, "We will never, ever be blind to it. We know what is going on and we remember what happened."
Although Trump said he was "completely" canceling Obama's Cuba policy, the change is posture is only a partial shift from Obama's policy.
Diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba will remain open, as will the newly opened embassies in Washington and Havana. And there will be no further restrictions on the types of goods that Americans can take out of Cuba, including the country's popular rum and cigars.
Trump said he is keeping the embassy open "in the hope that our countries can forge a much stronger and better path."
The changes do, however, tighten restrictions on Cuba and ratchet up rhetoric on the Castro regime in hopes that it will lead to a transition of power on the island. Many presidents, though, have predicted the end of the Castros and, to date, none have been correct.
The Trump administration will begin strictly enforcing the authorized exemptions that allow travel between the US and Cuba and prohibit commerce with Cuban businesses owned by the military and intelligence services. The President also directed Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to convene a task force on expanding Internet access on the island and reiterate the United States' opposition to efforts in the United Nations to lift the Cuban embargo until more is done to honor human rights.
[snip]
www.cnn.com
What a joke, if anything opening up Americans to Cuban culture would of been better. This guy is just rattling the old Cubans that despise the Castro regime. While there's nothing the US can do on how Cuba treats it's people imo, other than letting them have american visitors, and letting the US people see it first hand. I used to visit Cuba a ton, now this idiot is going to make it more difficult for Cubans who rely on families that travel back to bring food...
If anything, I felt like having decent Cuban relations would of been better for the U.S. Especially with how Cuba is sending troops to Venezuela, and Russia, NK, China, all having embassies on the island? They are still communist/dictatorship, they will still run back to others if needed... This guy is a buffoon.
|
sadly most people have a poor grasp of foreign policy; so some foolishly lap up such statements and support leaders doing dumb things because it looks good to them.
|
I'm sure NRA members are livid about this...
After five days of deliberations, a jury has found a Minnesota police officer not guilty on all counts over his deadly shooting of a black man during a traffic stop last July in Falcon Heights, a suburb of St. Paul, Minn.
"The system continues to fail black people, and it will continue to fail you all," Valerie Castile, Philando's mother, told reporters after the verdict. "My son loved this city and this city killed my son and the murderer gets away. ...I'm mad as hell right now."
Castile's sister Allysza, weeping, said "he didn't deserve to die the way he did, and I will never have faith in this system." Castile family lawyer Glenda Hatchett vowed to continue fighting.
Castile, a 32-year-old school cafeteria worker, was driving with his girlfriend and her 4-year-old daughter when they were pulled over by St. Anthony police Officer Jeronimo Yanez.
"Seventy-four seconds after Yanez activated his squad lights, he fired the last of seven shots into the car," Minnesota Public Radio's Matt Sepic reported.
Source
|
Just remember, for a police officer to kill you, he just needs to say he was mildly scared for his life. And then the Judge will tell the jury that mild scared for his life allows the officer to use lethal force.
Disgusting. It is far to easy to get killed by a police officer in this country.
|
On June 17 2017 06:38 Plansix wrote:
Just remember, for a police officer to kill you, he just needs to say he was mildly scared for his life. And then the Judge will tell the jury that mild scared for his life allows the officer to use lethal force.
Disgusting. It is far to easy to get killed by a police officer in this country.
Pretty hard to make the "bad apple" argument when everyone rallied behind what is quite obviously a guilty officer.
|
I remember thinking at the time that this wasn't one of the best cases to put at the forefront of the issue because that officer was so obviously going to get convicted, and then after he was the other side could point out to it as a big symbol and say "See, the system is working, he got convicted".
I'm a naive person sometimes.
|
On June 17 2017 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 06:38 Plansix wrote:
Just remember, for a police officer to kill you, he just needs to say he was mildly scared for his life. And then the Judge will tell the jury that mild scared for his life allows the officer to use lethal force.
Disgusting. It is far to easy to get killed by a police officer in this country. Pretty hard to make the "bad apple" argument when everyone rallied behind what is quite obviously a guilty officer.
They couldn’t even get manslaughter. Manslaughter. But because afterwords he says “I was scared for my life” its all cool.
Guess what? All officers can say they were scared for their life after the fact. They will fake cry on the stand or do whatever it takes. And will because there is no way to prove them wrong. And the community will rally around them. The system will support them. And we will all have our faith in the system slowly eroded.
On June 17 2017 06:44 Nebuchad wrote:
I remember thinking at the time that this wasn't one of the best cases to put at the forefront of the issue because that officer was so obviously going to get convicted, and then after he was the other side could point out to it as a big symbol and say "See, the system is working, he got convicted".
I'm a naive person sometimes.
The fact that it is so atrocious is the only silver lining. Now people can say it really doesn’t matter how you act or if you comply or not. If the officer is scared, you get shot and its your fault.
That other female officer that shot that guy with his hands up was acquitted too, right? I seem to remember that.
|
On June 17 2017 05:59 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 05:27 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 05:21 Trainrunnef wrote:On June 17 2017 04:39 Plansix wrote:The parallels to the tech industry and the robber barons of the late 19th century grow by the day. Especially the “you know what you are getting into” attitude. Tesla not wanting its workers to unionize and other complaints. Uber existing. Facebook and Google doing anything to avoid hiring humans to moderate their websites. The unregulated, free spirited, scrappy, innovative upstarts taking on the world got rich and now they can’t understand why they should have to play by the same rules. On June 17 2017 04:35 KwarK wrote:On June 17 2017 04:30 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 04:06 Mohdoo wrote:On June 17 2017 04:02 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 03:54 Mohdoo wrote:On June 17 2017 03:21 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
The Walmart v Amazon war continues. Both want the others market. Amazon has an insane amount of cultural advantage though. Amazon is a company people would feel encouraged to test out. I generally agree with Amazon's perspective on how they can improve my life and add value. Walmart is like every single thing wrong with our country. I go out of my way to not interact with Walmart. Yes and you are clearly part of the demographic that Walmart wants, while Amazon wants to break into Walmarts hold over low income markets.
I am also not super exciting about Amazon’s pushes into all areas of the economy. I use their services, but I keep reading not great things about retail market nationwide. And the supply change for retail is a big part of our economy and tax base for states. I wonder if Amazon’s success will continue once the states have to start looking for other ways to pull in tax revenue. Kinda same deal as coal. The way I see it: If this is happening eventually anyway, let's just go ahead and rip the band aid off so we can deal with the problems sooner. We don't help ourselves by having pity on retail workers because their doom is already certain. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/04/the-silent-crisis-of-retail-employment/523428/How every NeoLiberal of you, no pity for people who lose jobs and there is nothing to replace them. And we wonder why Hillary lost. It is a much larger market. 100K jobs were lost in 6 months, which is the entire coal and steel industry in the US. I don’t think it is a disaster, but the “let the free market churn” style of economics might lead to many more sections of the country feeling left behind and ignored. I have no problem with change in economic realities, but they need to be managed. But the new coal mine Trump was bragging about is going to employ 70 people! Its ok, through the magic of positive thinking, Trump will get the economy to 5%. And we will do this by mandating 10 hour work days, 6 day work weeks and push the retirement age to 75. And all millennials must have at least 2 children after 1 year of marriage. I thought they were the anti-marriage generation... maybe we need to mandate that too. I saw two sets of think pieces on millennials side by side. Set one: Millennials don’t care about sex Millennials are only into casual sex, not long term relationships. Set two: Millennials are not into eating out Millennials don’t cook. So as far as I can tell, Millennials are mythical creatures that don’t eat food and have relationships in ways we cannot comprehend. And are also killing Applebees. Crazy thought. Maybe millennials don't do half the stuff previous generations did because millennials can't afford anything because a living wage is a taboo in this country. Yeah they're throwing off some of the shackles and institutions of old because those institutions are a crock of shit and new generations tend to do that sort of thing. But maybe people also don't get married if they can't afford a marriage. Maybe they don't buy a house and a new car every 3 years if they can't afford to even rent an apartment. Maybe they don't pump out children because they can't afford such extravagant things as food or diapers while also having debt up to their eyeballs from college. Maybe they're jaded on capitalism because they've seen capitalism is trying to take them down. The Right often bemoans these institutions dying off. People aren't getting married and having kids! This is horrible, the Nuclear family is dead! They're not consuming like we want to! But the last thing these same people want to do is pay someone anything approaching a living wage. Well, turns out you get what you pay for I suppose.
People (mostly conservatives) tout the virtues of the American Dream, and of a free capitalist market, and probably a dozen other old fashioned ideals, but we're starting to see how bad these things are for us long-term. Anyone who seriously thinks that any government is too much government has never seen how things work in the rest of the civilized world. Your precious capitalism ends up in a healthcare system that profits off the backs of people who end up dying, because they can't pay for medicine and procedures they need. I sound dramatic, but imagine it was you or your loved one who died, or had their life ruined, because big money decided they needed to also profit off your healthcare.
Your unregulated businesses, i.e. banks, end up running away with all kinds of grand theft, because nobody's watching them. Your tax cuts to the rich just go straight into their pockets, never to be seen by the people they employ. Meanwhile, nearly every other country on the planet gives their citizens peace of mind through universal healthcare, a system that is, by necessity, government-run. You see gun control effectively reducing casualties of violence, even in recent events. You see countries that are much more prosperous, and most of all, happier than we are. And the only reason we're not running our country like them is because America insists on claiming it's the greatest country on Earth, meanwhile we elected a buffoon to represent us, and we just have to be different from those Europeans.
But hey, those millenials don't know how good they've got it.
|
On June 17 2017 06:49 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 06:38 Plansix wrote:
Just remember, for a police officer to kill you, he just needs to say he was mildly scared for his life. And then the Judge will tell the jury that mild scared for his life allows the officer to use lethal force.
Disgusting. It is far to easy to get killed by a police officer in this country. Pretty hard to make the "bad apple" argument when everyone rallied behind what is quite obviously a guilty officer. They couldn’t even get manslaughter. Manslaughter. But because afterwords he says “I was scared for my life” its all cool. Guess what? All officers can say they were scared for their life after the fact. They will fake cry on the stand or do whatever it takes. And will because there is no way to prove them wrong. And the community will rally around them. The system will support them. And we will all have our faith in the system slowly eroded. Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 06:44 Nebuchad wrote:
I remember thinking at the time that this wasn't one of the best cases to put at the forefront of the issue because that officer was so obviously going to get convicted, and then after he was the other side could point out to it as a big symbol and say "See, the system is working, he got convicted".
I'm a naive person sometimes. The fact that it is so atrocious is the only silver lining. Now people can say it really doesn’t matter how you act or if you comply or not. If the officer is scared, you get shot and its your fault. That other female officer that shot that guy with his hands up was acquitted too, right? I seem to remember that.
maybe he really was scared for his life.
|
trump is a certain idiot just like his son. it was a great disappointment to realize just how stupid he was
|
On June 17 2017 07:21 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 06:49 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 06:38 Plansix wrote:
Just remember, for a police officer to kill you, he just needs to say he was mildly scared for his life. And then the Judge will tell the jury that mild scared for his life allows the officer to use lethal force.
Disgusting. It is far to easy to get killed by a police officer in this country. Pretty hard to make the "bad apple" argument when everyone rallied behind what is quite obviously a guilty officer. They couldn’t even get manslaughter. Manslaughter. But because afterwords he says “I was scared for my life” its all cool. Guess what? All officers can say they were scared for their life after the fact. They will fake cry on the stand or do whatever it takes. And will because there is no way to prove them wrong. And the community will rally around them. The system will support them. And we will all have our faith in the system slowly eroded. On June 17 2017 06:44 Nebuchad wrote:
I remember thinking at the time that this wasn't one of the best cases to put at the forefront of the issue because that officer was so obviously going to get convicted, and then after he was the other side could point out to it as a big symbol and say "See, the system is working, he got convicted".
I'm a naive person sometimes. The fact that it is so atrocious is the only silver lining. Now people can say it really doesn’t matter how you act or if you comply or not. If the officer is scared, you get shot and its your fault. That other female officer that shot that guy with his hands up was acquitted too, right? I seem to remember that. maybe he really was scared for his life.
He probably was, and the jury could empathize, that's how crazed things have gotten. Same for the woman, Tamir's murderers, on and on.
"You mean to tell me there was an unchained black man/large child roaming freely in public?! No wonder you were terrified so much you felt retreat, deescalation, or less than lethal force were not options and you had no other choice than to execute them on sight. Hopefully you can continue to enjoy your life and not let this upset you too much moving forward".
|
The thing that really caps it for me is 7 shots. Like... really?
|
On June 17 2017 06:44 Nebuchad wrote:
I remember thinking at the time that this wasn't one of the best cases to put at the forefront of the issue because that officer was so obviously going to get convicted, and then after he was the other side could point out to it as a big symbol and say "See, the system is working, he got convicted".
I'm a naive person sometimes.
I don't even see how he got off free. In my cursory research I found Philando got shot because he said he had a gun, but also that he never drew it. Even if it was subconscious, it sounds like a racially motivated shooting through and through, the man was clearly never going to be a threat to the officer. He was a cafeteria worker who was driving home with his girlfriend and her 4 year-old. Which aspect of his character justified the shooting?
Apparently the officer was either fired or resigned, when it sounds by all accounts he should be in jail.
|
On June 17 2017 07:21 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 06:49 Plansix wrote:On June 17 2017 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 06:38 Plansix wrote:
Just remember, for a police officer to kill you, he just needs to say he was mildly scared for his life. And then the Judge will tell the jury that mild scared for his life allows the officer to use lethal force.
Disgusting. It is far to easy to get killed by a police officer in this country. Pretty hard to make the "bad apple" argument when everyone rallied behind what is quite obviously a guilty officer. They couldn’t even get manslaughter. Manslaughter. But because afterwords he says “I was scared for my life” its all cool. Guess what? All officers can say they were scared for their life after the fact. They will fake cry on the stand or do whatever it takes. And will because there is no way to prove them wrong. And the community will rally around them. The system will support them. And we will all have our faith in the system slowly eroded. On June 17 2017 06:44 Nebuchad wrote:
I remember thinking at the time that this wasn't one of the best cases to put at the forefront of the issue because that officer was so obviously going to get convicted, and then after he was the other side could point out to it as a big symbol and say "See, the system is working, he got convicted".
I'm a naive person sometimes. The fact that it is so atrocious is the only silver lining. Now people can say it really doesn’t matter how you act or if you comply or not. If the officer is scared, you get shot and its your fault. That other female officer that shot that guy with his hands up was acquitted too, right? I seem to remember that. maybe he really was scared for his life.
That really, really shouldn't matter. He is supposed to be a professional policeman, not a scared teenager with a gun. This is such bullshit. There are obviously major problems going on with the US police that lead to way too many people being shot by them.
I have no idea how exactly to fix those problems, but they definitively are not unfixable, as other countries don't have that problem. I'd guess stuff like better training, accountability, and actually punishing those who misbehave are good first steps. Every single time a cop shoots someone, there needs to be an independent investigation, and every time he fires his gun, there needs to be a justification.
US cops just shoot way too much, too fast, and it seems to be ok for a lot of people. If i were a black dude being pulled over by cops in the US, i would fear for my life. That is wrong. I can't even imagine what that would be like. Cops are supposed to protect the population, but in the US, they seem to protect cops first, anyone else second.
I am very glad that i don't have to fear for my life every time i meet a cop here in Germany. I don't exactly know what we do better than the US, but it must be something important, because german cops barely ever shoot anyone (Single digit amounts of people killed by police, about a hundred rounds fired in total throughout germany each year), and if they do, it is almost always completely justified. The US police kills about 10 times more people each year then the german police fires shots. (Granted, the US is also about 5 times bigger)
|
On June 17 2017 07:36 Gahlo wrote:
The thing that really caps it for me is 7 shots. Like... really?
We've had this discussion. Your average cop is a horrible shot and unsuited for a 'combat' situation.
Which ofc begs the question; if they were all well trained (say Rangers or Seals level competency), then would we see more or less shootings? We all know the hammer and nails argument, but at the same time they would be less likely to get scared into violence so easily imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
