|
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 14:26 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 14:18 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
So how often dó police officers get shot at during mundane things like traffic stops? Because most of these cases the officer freaks out and empties his gun due to some random gesture the victim made (like finding his wallet) that he interpreted as 'threatening'
If there is a legitimate problem with their safety there should be a different procedure for stops like making people step out of the car first before getting close so there is no way of misinterpreting gestures or hidden guns. If mundane tasks give a cop a feeling his life is threatened then either the cop is very incompetent and not fit for duty or the procedure for doing the task is just faulty because a cop should always be in control of a normal situation. It's really fucking retarded that it's allowed to kill someone sitting in a carseat because he's so 'threatening'.
If there isn't even a legitimate police safety problem then well the situation is even worse I think any change to procedure that will further inconvenience drivers who get pulled over is going to be untenable. Some of police training is designed to prevent cops from getting shot during traffic stops, but unless the driver keeps his hands visible the whole time (strongly recommended), the cop takes on some risk. Now Kwark would argue that the officer accepted that risk and must be willing to get shot to avoid accidentally shooting an unarmed person. The side effect is that this incentivizes criminals to try to shoot and run because they know their chances of success are higher than in the times when cops were too trigger happy (this is an assertion and I don't have evidence to back it up).
If the risk is real there should be a better way to handle it than approaching a traffic stop as a 1v1 pistol duel. Yes it will inconvenience drivers but that's better than people getting killed for nothing.
If the risk is not real then the selection criteria for police need to be changed because if you hear this officers voice in the video of the incident he's clearly lost control and is tripping out of his mind. From a traffic stop.
It should never end up with a innocent guy shot dead in his car with his family and the judge ruling nothing was wrong
|
United States24769 Posts
On June 17 2017 14:31 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 14:29 micronesia wrote:On June 17 2017 14:27 Nebuchad wrote:On June 17 2017 14:08 micronesia wrote:On June 17 2017 14:04 Nebuchad wrote:On June 17 2017 14:02 micronesia wrote:
Did the (hypothetical) cop really have a decent case? He shot an unarmed man who did nothing wrong. He should be willing to take the bullet in that 1% case where it's actually a gun being pulled out. Guilty of manslaughter. The facts speak for themselves. But it's not going to be 1% a gun, cause there's this weird unlikely light effect that makes it look exactly like a gun. The large majority of the time it's going to be a gun, otherwise the light effect wouldn't be unlikely. The point I want to make is there is absolutely no way to come up with hard and fast rules for determining if what the cop did was legally excusable or not (if he actually thinks he was in danger, there is going to be at least some controversy and the fact can't simply speak for themselves), and to discuss a real case from this perspective is going to make it almost impossible to convince someone who currently is on the other side of the fence that the evidence leans much more heavily towards guilt and some type of conviction. As an aside, Kwark, cops really need to get paid more given your explanation of their responsibilities (note I have no problem with wanting to create a society where cops shooting innocent people is extremely rare) You need to look at the facts to determine whether there's a reasonable way in which the cop can feel threatened. If you start ignoring the facts, there is literally no way a cop can do a wrongful shooting ever, and that kills the whole point of having a discussion. Did you interpret me saying "the facts can't simply speak for themselves" to mean "ignore the facts"? That is not what I meant. Indeed, the facts are the most important part of evaluating what happened and determining what outcome is most appropriate for the officer who shot the unarmed person. Okay so I disagree with your assessment that "if he actually thinks he was in danger, there is going to be at least some controversy". I think you have to ignore the facts at least to some extent to make that assessment.
Which facts need to be ignored to make that assessment? It's a general assessment and not generated based on any of the facts of the individual news item you all were discussing. If anything is suspect in the statement, I think I could use a softer word than controversy. Once the cop thinks he is in danger, it becomes difficult and complex to determine if the cop was at fault or more importantly how at fault he was, and this will be a source for disagreement. In a given case, some will think the facts point towards deserving a manslaughter charge, others will think a lesser charge is in order. As long as the issue is being discussed from that perspective instead of the black and white "cop is obviously guilty in this case" or "cop is obviously not guilty in this case" then I think dissenters will be easier to convince that the cop really was out of line in this case.
|
United States43956 Posts
On June 17 2017 14:08 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 14:04 Nebuchad wrote:On June 17 2017 14:02 micronesia wrote:
Did the (hypothetical) cop really have a decent case? He shot an unarmed man who did nothing wrong. He should be willing to take the bullet in that 1% case where it's actually a gun being pulled out. Guilty of manslaughter. The facts speak for themselves. But it's not going to be 1% a gun, cause there's this weird unlikely light effect that makes it look exactly like a gun. The large majority of the time it's going to be a gun, otherwise the light effect wouldn't be unlikely. I agree with that analysis. But what is the result? Given the evidence, acquit the cop? edit: it looks like Kwark says yes, because they can prove what they saw was a gun. Of course now you have a problem that there's another case where there was a less strong optical illusion, and it kind of looked like a gun being drawn and pointed. The point I want to make is there is absolutely no way to come up with hard and fast rules for determining if what the cop did was legally excusable or not (if he actually thinks he was in danger, there is going to be at least some controversy and the fact can't simply speak for themselves), and to discuss a real case from this perspective is going to make it almost impossible to convince someone who currently is on the other side of the fence that the evidence leans much more heavily towards guilt and some type of conviction. As an aside, Kwark, cops really need to get paid more given your explanation of their responsibilities (note I have no problem with wanting to create a society where cops shooting innocent people is extremely rare)
It's not like they actually get shot very often. But yeah, sure, if we include an element of danger and risking their lives to protect the citizens they serve in the job description and suddenly half the police force nope out then yeah, offer more money until you find people willing to wait and see a gun before executing members of the public.
That said, we pay privates in Afghanistan less and hold them to a stricter rules of engagement than the police.
|
On June 17 2017 13:02 KwarK wrote:
If your method of stopping rapes is telling women which things they ought not to do then yes, you're putting the duty of preventing rapes on the victims of rapes. The only thing a woman need do to avoid a rape is not rape anyone. If you don't want me to think that the thing you keep fucking arguing is your opinion then stop arguing it. You can't keep up this "I'm just interested in stopping rapes by telling women how to avoid getting raped by going after the conditions" while simultaneously claiming you're not limiting them. The two are mutually exclusive. Take it to its logical extreme, Saudi Arabia style. Women not allowed out of the house without their husband or father. Odds of a Saudi woman being attacked while walking home alone drunk from a club are pretty low. And, naturally, if you were to rape a woman doing that in Saudi Arabia she'd be blamed more than you. That's the logical conclusion of your argument, and every step on the path to Saudi Arabia is equally disgusting.
thinking the government is going to protect you is a dreamworld. safety is an illusion.
i was sexually assaulted last july. it was very minor. i'm fine. however, had i taken some pretty simple precautions it never would've happened.
anyone can be sexually assaulted. and everyone should take precautions if it is a concern. children are street-proofed as a method of the child protecting themselves when their parents are not around.
if parents want to put some emphasis and effort into teaching their children the basics are staying safe against idiots and lunatics.. i'm all for it.
|
United States43956 Posts
On June 17 2017 14:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 13:02 KwarK wrote:
If your method of stopping rapes is telling women which things they ought not to do then yes, you're putting the duty of preventing rapes on the victims of rapes. The only thing a woman need do to avoid a rape is not rape anyone. If you don't want me to think that the thing you keep fucking arguing is your opinion then stop arguing it. You can't keep up this "I'm just interested in stopping rapes by telling women how to avoid getting raped by going after the conditions" while simultaneously claiming you're not limiting them. The two are mutually exclusive. Take it to its logical extreme, Saudi Arabia style. Women not allowed out of the house without their husband or father. Odds of a Saudi woman being attacked while walking home alone drunk from a club are pretty low. And, naturally, if you were to rape a woman doing that in Saudi Arabia she'd be blamed more than you. That's the logical conclusion of your argument, and every step on the path to Saudi Arabia is equally disgusting. thinking the government is going to protect you is a dreamworld. safety is an illusion. i was sexually assaulted last july. it was very minor. i'm fine. however, had i taken some pretty simple precautions it never would've happened. anyone can be sexually assaulted.
And if you want to choose to take those precautions then feel free. But you didn't cause it to happen by failing to take those precautions. As you say, anyone can be sexually assaulted. Victims come in all shapes and sizes and a lot of them do all the right things society tells them to do and still get assaulted. It's part of why the whole "how to avoid being raped" idea is so incredibly destructive. It forces victims to examine their own choices and continually ask themselves what they could have done differently to avoid it with self hating shit like "I should have known better" or "I shouldn't have trusted them" when the reality is that it's outside their control.
Rapists would get away with rape a lot less often if victims weren't conditioned to automatically feel shame and treat their victimhood as a mark of personal failure. Hell, rapists would get convicted a hell of a lot more often if victim blaming hadn't thoroughly permeated our societal assumptions. Half of all people surveyed will assign a portion of blame to the victim in a hypothetical that includes the victim clearly stating that they did not consent and being physically overpowered if the victim had been drinking, was in a relationship with the rapist, was known for promiscuity, or had flirted with the rapist earlier. The reason defence lawyers routinely slut shame rape victims is because juries lap that shit up, they are desperate to reaffirm that rape victims must have done something to deserve to get raped whereas good chaste women never get raped.
The idea of being a victim of sexual assault is scary. Therefore the idea that there are things you can do to stop it is comforting, and if you can choose not to be a victim then surely those who became victims chose to be. But it's not true and it is incredibly damaging to society as a whole.
|
On June 17 2017 14:42 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 14:31 Nebuchad wrote:On June 17 2017 14:29 micronesia wrote:On June 17 2017 14:27 Nebuchad wrote:On June 17 2017 14:08 micronesia wrote:On June 17 2017 14:04 Nebuchad wrote:On June 17 2017 14:02 micronesia wrote:
Did the (hypothetical) cop really have a decent case? He shot an unarmed man who did nothing wrong. He should be willing to take the bullet in that 1% case where it's actually a gun being pulled out. Guilty of manslaughter. The facts speak for themselves. But it's not going to be 1% a gun, cause there's this weird unlikely light effect that makes it look exactly like a gun. The large majority of the time it's going to be a gun, otherwise the light effect wouldn't be unlikely. The point I want to make is there is absolutely no way to come up with hard and fast rules for determining if what the cop did was legally excusable or not (if he actually thinks he was in danger, there is going to be at least some controversy and the fact can't simply speak for themselves), and to discuss a real case from this perspective is going to make it almost impossible to convince someone who currently is on the other side of the fence that the evidence leans much more heavily towards guilt and some type of conviction. As an aside, Kwark, cops really need to get paid more given your explanation of their responsibilities (note I have no problem with wanting to create a society where cops shooting innocent people is extremely rare) You need to look at the facts to determine whether there's a reasonable way in which the cop can feel threatened. If you start ignoring the facts, there is literally no way a cop can do a wrongful shooting ever, and that kills the whole point of having a discussion. Did you interpret me saying "the facts can't simply speak for themselves" to mean "ignore the facts"? That is not what I meant. Indeed, the facts are the most important part of evaluating what happened and determining what outcome is most appropriate for the officer who shot the unarmed person. Okay so I disagree with your assessment that "if he actually thinks he was in danger, there is going to be at least some controversy". I think you have to ignore the facts at least to some extent to make that assessment. Which facts need to be ignored to make that assessment? It's a general assessment and not generated based on any of the facts of the individual news item you all were discussing. If anything is suspect in the statement, I think I could use a softer word than controversy. Once the cop thinks he is in danger, it becomes difficult and complex to determine if the cop was at fault or more importantly how at fault he was, and this will be a source for disagreement. In a given case, some will think the facts point towards deserving a manslaughter charge, others will think a lesser charge is in order. As long as the issue is being discussed from that perspective instead of the black and white "cop is obviously guilty in this case" or "cop is obviously not guilty in this case" then I think dissenters will be easier to convince that the cop really was out of line in this case.
It's not specific facts that you have to ignore, it's situations where the cop genuinely thinks he was in danger, but he clearly wasn't (based on the facts). To claim that the situation is necessarily complex or controversial when the cop thinks it is, you have to ignore the facts in certain situations.
To give an extreme example just like you did (but probably way more common in America to be honest), what if a cop genuinely feels that black people are very threatening? Doesn't make him shooting an unarmed black person who was minding his own business any more controversial, obviously. Doesn't make him shooting a black person that comes at him with a gun after having killed five other people wrong either.
Before we start engaging into this deep level where everything is complex and controversial, we need to look at the facts of the case and see if they warrant such effort. In this case they really don't.
|
On June 17 2017 14:53 KwarK wrote: "how to avoid being raped" idea is so incredibly destructive. It forces victims to examine their own choices and continually ask themselves what they could have done differently to avoid it with self hating shit like "I should have known better" or "I shouldn't have trusted them" when the reality is that it's outside their control.
Rapists would get away with rape a lot less often if victims weren't conditioned to automatically feel shame and treat their victimhood as a mark of personal failure.
everything is outside our control. the sun can burn out in an hour.
the personal failure thing and its devastating psychological effects are much deeper in children than adults. adults are much better equipped to deal with all forms of trauma.
rape is a violent crime. so is murder, multiple torso stabbings, etc...
every citizen of Toronto is theoretically free to regularly hang out around parliament//queen at 2 am on Friday night. if i know someone is hanging out there regularly i advise them against it because its a war zone. if someone gets themselves fucked up there ... whether its an aggravated assault. a brutal stabbing, gets shot, or raped..
what are you doing hanging out at Queen//Parliament at 2am on Friday for like the 10th time this summer. can't u find ur acid and LSD someplace else?
Furthermore, i advise children to stay away from there at all costs.
|
On June 17 2017 14:26 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 14:18 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
So how often dó police officers get shot at during mundane things like traffic stops? Because most of these cases the officer freaks out and empties his gun due to some random gesture the victim made (like finding his wallet) that he interpreted as 'threatening'
If there is a legitimate problem with their safety there should be a different procedure for stops like making people step out of the car first before getting close so there is no way of misinterpreting gestures or hidden guns. If mundane tasks give a cop a feeling his life is threatened then either the cop is very incompetent and not fit for duty or the procedure for doing the task is just faulty because a cop should always be in control of a normal situation. It's really fucking retarded that it's allowed to kill someone sitting in a carseat because he's so 'threatening'.
If there isn't even a legitimate police safety problem then well the situation is even worse I think any change to procedure that will further inconvenience drivers who get pulled over is going to be untenable. Some of police training is designed to prevent cops from getting shot during traffic stops, but unless the driver keeps his hands visible the whole time (strongly recommended), the cop takes on some risk. Now Kwark would argue that the officer accepted that risk and must be willing to get shot to avoid accidentally shooting an unarmed person. The side effect is that this incentivizes criminals to try to shoot and run because they know their chances of success are higher than in the times when cops were too trigger happy (this is an assertion and I don't have evidence to back it up).
You know the risks when you take the job. It's not even a dangerous job! Many jobs seen as completely mundane are actually more dangerous than being a cop and yet no one bats an eye at them. I'd rather a cop risk being shot than them shooting a civilian on accident, absolutely I'll take that trade off every single time. Just like I'd rather see a guilty man go free than an innocent man in prison. Like Kwark said we ask people fighting wars to live up to far higher standards for less money, we're not asking for anything crazy here.
You asked earlier and cops do deserve to make more on average (though in a lot of places they make a pretty good living with pension and all that). However I believe we need significantly less police. We've got a lot of dumb af laws because we've gotta keep the beast fed. I'd rather have less police overall, but better trained, staffed, and paid and also solving actual crimes. Not busting people for weed or issuing tickets to meet a funding quota, that's absolute horse shit. It doesn't make anyone safer. Problem is 1 solved crime is 1 solved crime is 1 solved crime. Busting a kid with a dimebag or catching Jeffrey Dahmer are both 1 hash mark in the crime solved column so there's zero incentive for police do to any real police work, that is absolutely cancerous. The metrics are a complete joke.
But I think the same thing of our ridiculous military as our police. I'd rather have significantly fewer soldiers that are far more elite. Better trained, paid, and equipped but all cut from far better cloth.
|
On June 17 2017 15:12 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 14:53 KwarK wrote: "how to avoid being raped" idea is so incredibly destructive. It forces victims to examine their own choices and continually ask themselves what they could have done differently to avoid it with self hating shit like "I should have known better" or "I shouldn't have trusted them" when the reality is that it's outside their control.
Rapists would get away with rape a lot less often if victims weren't conditioned to automatically feel shame and treat their victimhood as a mark of personal failure. everything is outside our control. the sun can burn out in an hour. the personal failure thing and its devastating psychological effects are much deeper in children than adults. adults are much better equipped to deal with all forms of trauma. rape is a violent crime. so is murder, multiple torso stabbings, etc... every citizen of Toronto is theoretically free to regularly hang out around parliament//queen at 2 am on Friday night. if i know someone is hanging out there regularly i advise them against it because its a war zone. if someone gets themselves fucked up there ... whether its an aggravated assault. a brutal stabbing, gets shot, or raped.. what are you doing hanging out at Queen//Parliament at 2am on Friday for like the 10th time this summer. can't u find ur acid and LSD someplace else? Furthermore, i advise children to stay away from there at all costs.
Wtf are you talking about? The vast majority of rapes are commited by close relations. The victim feeling guilty is an established issue, don't mix up your opinion with facts please.
|
I'm glad folks tried the various strategies of being polite, stripping race from the situation, offering solutions, shaming, and engaging in dumb hypothetical situations.
They work any better for you guys? Best I can tell no one has been convinced of anything beyond what they thought before and so we can count on being right back here the next time. Though if it's not so absurdly obvious, we may lose some folks who again fail to see how consistently shitty the justice system is.
Since I know a lot of people thought that Shitbag Slager was guaranteed to get the book thrown at him and yet he's still sitting on his couch watching TV after pleading guilty to some bullshit "excessive force" charge (a month+ ago), what do people think his sentence will actually be?
|
On June 17 2017 10:27 Plansix wrote:
Rape isn't like getting caught in the rain. It's not something you avoid, like the flu or late fees. Someone breaks into my home, no one asks if I had to many windows and was asking for it.
Some devil's advocating here:
Actually, a friend of mine's house got broken into (in Brazil). And we kinda looked at how he said they got in and figured it was stupidly easy. We advised him to move, because if it was that easy once, it'd be that easy a second time too.
After the second time they broke in, he did move. There's obviously traits that make you more or less likely to be a victim, and trying to reduce those traits seems fairly normal behavior. It doesn't mean you're to blame. But I can see how saying you have a gun and then reaching to your waste could get you shot by the overly trigger-happy cops you appear to have over there. So while I think the cop should be locked up for manslaughter, there clearly is a way to reduce your chance of getting shot in this situation, just as my friend could (and eventually did) reduce his chance of being burgled.
|
On June 17 2017 17:32 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 10:27 Plansix wrote:
Rape isn't like getting caught in the rain. It's not something you avoid, like the flu or late fees. Someone breaks into my home, no one asks if I had to many windows and was asking for it. Some devil's advocating here: Actually, a friend of mine's house got broken into (in Brazil). And we kinda looked at how he said they got in and figured it was stupidly easy. We advised him to move, because if it was that easy once, it'd be that easy a second time too. After the second time they broke in, he did move. There's obviously traits that make you more or less likely to be a victim, and trying to reduce those traits seems fairly normal behavior. It doesn't mean you're to blame. But I can see how saying you have a gun and then reaching to your waste could get you shot by the overly trigger-happy cops you appear to have over there. So while I think the cop should be locked up for manslaughter, there clearly is a way to reduce your chance of getting shot in this situation, just as my friend could (and eventually did) reduce his chance of being burgled.
Just curious, what were you thinking, because not being black would have been his best defense in my eyes.
|
On June 17 2017 17:39 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 17:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 10:27 Plansix wrote:
Rape isn't like getting caught in the rain. It's not something you avoid, like the flu or late fees. Someone breaks into my home, no one asks if I had to many windows and was asking for it. Some devil's advocating here: Actually, a friend of mine's house got broken into (in Brazil). And we kinda looked at how he said they got in and figured it was stupidly easy. We advised him to move, because if it was that easy once, it'd be that easy a second time too. After the second time they broke in, he did move. There's obviously traits that make you more or less likely to be a victim, and trying to reduce those traits seems fairly normal behavior. It doesn't mean you're to blame. But I can see how saying you have a gun and then reaching to your waste could get you shot by the overly trigger-happy cops you appear to have over there. So while I think the cop should be locked up for manslaughter, there clearly is a way to reduce your chance of getting shot in this situation, just as my friend could (and eventually did) reduce his chance of being burgled. Just curious, what were you thinking, because not being black would have been his best defense in my eyes.
I was actually just the working with the situation here. I think the situation is shit, and should be changed. Cops continuously shooting Innocent black men is an atrocious status quo.
But given that it IS the status quo, and if you are an innocent black man, it is better to do whatever you can to prevent getting shot. Generally that will be keeping your hands on the steering wheel and doing exactly as the cop tells you. And if the instructions are contradictory (keep your hands on the steering wheel and hand over your license and registration), make it clear you're going to have to reach into your pocket to get your license, and ask the cop whether that is ok. US Cops should clearly be treated as armed muggers in Brazil: you do exactly what they want and pray they don't shoot you anyway. Most of the time they won't, and when they do they'll probably get away with it.
|
On June 17 2017 18:32 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 17:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 17:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 10:27 Plansix wrote:
Rape isn't like getting caught in the rain. It's not something you avoid, like the flu or late fees. Someone breaks into my home, no one asks if I had to many windows and was asking for it. Some devil's advocating here: Actually, a friend of mine's house got broken into (in Brazil). And we kinda looked at how he said they got in and figured it was stupidly easy. We advised him to move, because if it was that easy once, it'd be that easy a second time too. After the second time they broke in, he did move. There's obviously traits that make you more or less likely to be a victim, and trying to reduce those traits seems fairly normal behavior. It doesn't mean you're to blame. But I can see how saying you have a gun and then reaching to your waste could get you shot by the overly trigger-happy cops you appear to have over there. So while I think the cop should be locked up for manslaughter, there clearly is a way to reduce your chance of getting shot in this situation, just as my friend could (and eventually did) reduce his chance of being burgled. Just curious, what were you thinking, because not being black would have been his best defense in my eyes. I was actually just the working with the situation here. I think the situation is shit, and should be changed. Cops continuously shooting Innocent black men is an atrocious status quo. But given that it IS the status quo, and if you are an innocent black man, it is better to do whatever you can to prevent getting shot. Generally that will be keeping your hands on the steering wheel and doing exactly as the cop tells you. And if the instructions are contradictory (keep your hands on the steering wheel and hand over your license and registration), make it clear you're going to have to reach into your pocket to get your license, and ask the cop whether that is ok. US Cops should clearly be treated as armed muggers in Brazil: you do exactly what they want and pray they don't shoot you anyway. Most of the time they won't, and when they do they'll probably get away with it.
I certainly don't disagree with the notion that individuals can take individual measures to decrease their risk...
BUT
those measures should NOT be proposed as a solution to the problem at a society-wide level.
I don't think that's what you're saying but it is very important to make this distinction.
|
|
|
On June 17 2017 18:32 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 17:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 17:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 10:27 Plansix wrote:
Rape isn't like getting caught in the rain. It's not something you avoid, like the flu or late fees. Someone breaks into my home, no one asks if I had to many windows and was asking for it. Some devil's advocating here: Actually, a friend of mine's house got broken into (in Brazil). And we kinda looked at how he said they got in and figured it was stupidly easy. We advised him to move, because if it was that easy once, it'd be that easy a second time too. After the second time they broke in, he did move. There's obviously traits that make you more or less likely to be a victim, and trying to reduce those traits seems fairly normal behavior. It doesn't mean you're to blame. But I can see how saying you have a gun and then reaching to your waste could get you shot by the overly trigger-happy cops you appear to have over there. So while I think the cop should be locked up for manslaughter, there clearly is a way to reduce your chance of getting shot in this situation, just as my friend could (and eventually did) reduce his chance of being burgled. Just curious, what were you thinking, because not being black would have been his best defense in my eyes. I was actually just the working with the situation here. I think the situation is shit, and should be changed. Cops continuously shooting Innocent black men is an atrocious status quo. But given that it IS the status quo, and if you are an innocent black man, it is better to do whatever you can to prevent getting shot. Generally that will be keeping your hands on the steering wheel and doing exactly as the cop tells you. And if the instructions are contradictory (keep your hands on the steering wheel and hand over your license and registration), make it clear you're going to have to reach into your pocket to get your license, and ask the cop whether that is ok. US Cops should clearly be treated as armed muggers in Brazil: you do exactly what they want and pray they don't shoot you anyway. Most of the time they won't, and when they do they'll probably get away with it.
What makes you think that's not what he did? Some may wonder why someone would pay them on top of the extortion and theft.
It's almost like the police in America are literally a government sanctioned gang. If I understand correctly your advice is to acquiesce to the gang no matter how egregious the demands in perpetuity, am I correct?
|
On June 17 2017 19:13 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 18:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 17:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 17:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 10:27 Plansix wrote:
Rape isn't like getting caught in the rain. It's not something you avoid, like the flu or late fees. Someone breaks into my home, no one asks if I had to many windows and was asking for it. Some devil's advocating here: Actually, a friend of mine's house got broken into (in Brazil). And we kinda looked at how he said they got in and figured it was stupidly easy. We advised him to move, because if it was that easy once, it'd be that easy a second time too. After the second time they broke in, he did move. There's obviously traits that make you more or less likely to be a victim, and trying to reduce those traits seems fairly normal behavior. It doesn't mean you're to blame. But I can see how saying you have a gun and then reaching to your waste could get you shot by the overly trigger-happy cops you appear to have over there. So while I think the cop should be locked up for manslaughter, there clearly is a way to reduce your chance of getting shot in this situation, just as my friend could (and eventually did) reduce his chance of being burgled. Just curious, what were you thinking, because not being black would have been his best defense in my eyes. I was actually just the working with the situation here. I think the situation is shit, and should be changed. Cops continuously shooting Innocent black men is an atrocious status quo. But given that it IS the status quo, and if you are an innocent black man, it is better to do whatever you can to prevent getting shot. Generally that will be keeping your hands on the steering wheel and doing exactly as the cop tells you. And if the instructions are contradictory (keep your hands on the steering wheel and hand over your license and registration), make it clear you're going to have to reach into your pocket to get your license, and ask the cop whether that is ok. US Cops should clearly be treated as armed muggers in Brazil: you do exactly what they want and pray they don't shoot you anyway. Most of the time they won't, and when they do they'll probably get away with it. What makes you think that's not what he did? Some may wonder why someone would pay them on top of the extortion and theft. It's almost like the police in America are literally a government sanctioned gang. If I understand correctly your advice is to acquiesce to the gang no matter how egregious the demands in perpetuity, am I correct?
No. His advice is : If you are in a traffic stop, act as if the cop were an armed mugger. Be very calm, keep your hands very clear, make it exceedingly clear what you are going to do beforehand and ask if that is ok, move very slowly, do exactly what they tell you and hope you don't get shot. This may still not prevent them from shooting you, but it reduces the chances of that happening.
If you are not in a traffic stop, do whatever you can to reform the gang of legal armed muggers into an actual police force. Which is probably not a lot, since you are just one dude in a crooked system. But don't ever confront the armed mugger while he is mugging you, that is just gonna get you shot. Do it at any other time, when you are not in a traffic stop.
There are two levels going on here: What to do in the actual situation while it is happening, and what to do outside of that situation to stop it from constantly happening. What you as an individual do just to not get shot at the moment is not a societal solution to the problem, it is a momentary stopgap to protect yourself. It is very shitty that you need one. You should not need one. But you currently do. Everyone should agree that that situation is utterly ridiculous and needs to be changed. Whoever doesn't is clearly insane. But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't protect yourself in the insane situation as best as possible, while trying to change it when you are safe.
|
On June 17 2017 19:46 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 19:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 18:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 17:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 17:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 10:27 Plansix wrote:
Rape isn't like getting caught in the rain. It's not something you avoid, like the flu or late fees. Someone breaks into my home, no one asks if I had to many windows and was asking for it. Some devil's advocating here: Actually, a friend of mine's house got broken into (in Brazil). And we kinda looked at how he said they got in and figured it was stupidly easy. We advised him to move, because if it was that easy once, it'd be that easy a second time too. After the second time they broke in, he did move. There's obviously traits that make you more or less likely to be a victim, and trying to reduce those traits seems fairly normal behavior. It doesn't mean you're to blame. But I can see how saying you have a gun and then reaching to your waste could get you shot by the overly trigger-happy cops you appear to have over there. So while I think the cop should be locked up for manslaughter, there clearly is a way to reduce your chance of getting shot in this situation, just as my friend could (and eventually did) reduce his chance of being burgled. Just curious, what were you thinking, because not being black would have been his best defense in my eyes. I was actually just the working with the situation here. I think the situation is shit, and should be changed. Cops continuously shooting Innocent black men is an atrocious status quo. But given that it IS the status quo, and if you are an innocent black man, it is better to do whatever you can to prevent getting shot. Generally that will be keeping your hands on the steering wheel and doing exactly as the cop tells you. And if the instructions are contradictory (keep your hands on the steering wheel and hand over your license and registration), make it clear you're going to have to reach into your pocket to get your license, and ask the cop whether that is ok. US Cops should clearly be treated as armed muggers in Brazil: you do exactly what they want and pray they don't shoot you anyway. Most of the time they won't, and when they do they'll probably get away with it. What makes you think that's not what he did? Some may wonder why someone would pay them on top of the extortion and theft. It's almost like the police in America are literally a government sanctioned gang. If I understand correctly your advice is to acquiesce to the gang no matter how egregious the demands in perpetuity, am I correct? No. His advice is : If you are in a traffic stop, act as if the cop were an armed mugger. Be very calm, keep your hands very clear, make it exceedingly clear what you are going to do beforehand and ask if that is ok, move very slowly, do exactly what they tell you and hope you don't get shot. This may still not prevent them from shooting you, but it reduces the chances of that happening. If you are not in a traffic stop, do whatever you can to reform the gang of legal armed muggers into an actual police force. Which is probably not a lot, since you are just one dude in a crooked system. But don't ever confront the armed mugger while he is mugging you, that is just gonna get you shot. Do it at any other time, when you are not in a traffic stop. There are two levels going on here: What to do in the actual situation while it is happening, and what to do outside of that situation to stop it from constantly happening. What you as an individual do just to not get shot at the moment is not a societal solution to the problem, it is a momentary stopgap to protect yourself. It is very shitty that you need one. You should not need one. But you currently do. Everyone should agree that that situation is utterly ridiculous and needs to be changed. Whoever doesn't is clearly insane. But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't protect yourself in the insane situation as best as possible, while trying to change it when you are safe.
Then about half of the country is "clearly insane"
|
On June 17 2017 19:55 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 19:46 Simberto wrote:On June 17 2017 19:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 18:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 17:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 17:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 10:27 Plansix wrote:
Rape isn't like getting caught in the rain. It's not something you avoid, like the flu or late fees. Someone breaks into my home, no one asks if I had to many windows and was asking for it. Some devil's advocating here: Actually, a friend of mine's house got broken into (in Brazil). And we kinda looked at how he said they got in and figured it was stupidly easy. We advised him to move, because if it was that easy once, it'd be that easy a second time too. After the second time they broke in, he did move. There's obviously traits that make you more or less likely to be a victim, and trying to reduce those traits seems fairly normal behavior. It doesn't mean you're to blame. But I can see how saying you have a gun and then reaching to your waste could get you shot by the overly trigger-happy cops you appear to have over there. So while I think the cop should be locked up for manslaughter, there clearly is a way to reduce your chance of getting shot in this situation, just as my friend could (and eventually did) reduce his chance of being burgled. Just curious, what were you thinking, because not being black would have been his best defense in my eyes. I was actually just the working with the situation here. I think the situation is shit, and should be changed. Cops continuously shooting Innocent black men is an atrocious status quo. But given that it IS the status quo, and if you are an innocent black man, it is better to do whatever you can to prevent getting shot. Generally that will be keeping your hands on the steering wheel and doing exactly as the cop tells you. And if the instructions are contradictory (keep your hands on the steering wheel and hand over your license and registration), make it clear you're going to have to reach into your pocket to get your license, and ask the cop whether that is ok. US Cops should clearly be treated as armed muggers in Brazil: you do exactly what they want and pray they don't shoot you anyway. Most of the time they won't, and when they do they'll probably get away with it. What makes you think that's not what he did? Some may wonder why someone would pay them on top of the extortion and theft. It's almost like the police in America are literally a government sanctioned gang. If I understand correctly your advice is to acquiesce to the gang no matter how egregious the demands in perpetuity, am I correct? No. His advice is : If you are in a traffic stop, act as if the cop were an armed mugger. Be very calm, keep your hands very clear, make it exceedingly clear what you are going to do beforehand and ask if that is ok, move very slowly, do exactly what they tell you and hope you don't get shot. This may still not prevent them from shooting you, but it reduces the chances of that happening. If you are not in a traffic stop, do whatever you can to reform the gang of legal armed muggers into an actual police force. Which is probably not a lot, since you are just one dude in a crooked system. But don't ever confront the armed mugger while he is mugging you, that is just gonna get you shot. Do it at any other time, when you are not in a traffic stop. There are two levels going on here: What to do in the actual situation while it is happening, and what to do outside of that situation to stop it from constantly happening. What you as an individual do just to not get shot at the moment is not a societal solution to the problem, it is a momentary stopgap to protect yourself. It is very shitty that you need one. You should not need one. But you currently do. Everyone should agree that that situation is utterly ridiculous and needs to be changed. Whoever doesn't is clearly insane. But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't protect yourself in the insane situation as best as possible, while trying to change it when you are safe. Then about half of the country is "clearly insane"
That analysis is supported by the fact that they elected donald trump.
|
On June 17 2017 19:46 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 19:13 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 18:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 17:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 17 2017 17:32 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2017 10:27 Plansix wrote:
Rape isn't like getting caught in the rain. It's not something you avoid, like the flu or late fees. Someone breaks into my home, no one asks if I had to many windows and was asking for it. Some devil's advocating here: Actually, a friend of mine's house got broken into (in Brazil). And we kinda looked at how he said they got in and figured it was stupidly easy. We advised him to move, because if it was that easy once, it'd be that easy a second time too. After the second time they broke in, he did move. There's obviously traits that make you more or less likely to be a victim, and trying to reduce those traits seems fairly normal behavior. It doesn't mean you're to blame. But I can see how saying you have a gun and then reaching to your waste could get you shot by the overly trigger-happy cops you appear to have over there. So while I think the cop should be locked up for manslaughter, there clearly is a way to reduce your chance of getting shot in this situation, just as my friend could (and eventually did) reduce his chance of being burgled. Just curious, what were you thinking, because not being black would have been his best defense in my eyes. I was actually just the working with the situation here. I think the situation is shit, and should be changed. Cops continuously shooting Innocent black men is an atrocious status quo. But given that it IS the status quo, and if you are an innocent black man, it is better to do whatever you can to prevent getting shot. Generally that will be keeping your hands on the steering wheel and doing exactly as the cop tells you. And if the instructions are contradictory (keep your hands on the steering wheel and hand over your license and registration), make it clear you're going to have to reach into your pocket to get your license, and ask the cop whether that is ok. US Cops should clearly be treated as armed muggers in Brazil: you do exactly what they want and pray they don't shoot you anyway. Most of the time they won't, and when they do they'll probably get away with it. What makes you think that's not what he did? Some may wonder why someone would pay them on top of the extortion and theft. It's almost like the police in America are literally a government sanctioned gang. If I understand correctly your advice is to acquiesce to the gang no matter how egregious the demands in perpetuity, am I correct? No. His advice is : If you are in a traffic stop, act as if the cop were an armed mugger. Be very calm, keep your hands very clear, make it exceedingly clear what you are going to do beforehand and ask if that is ok, move very slowly, do exactly what they tell you and hope you don't get shot. This may still not prevent them from shooting you, but it reduces the chances of that happening. If you are not in a traffic stop, do whatever you can to reform the gang of legal armed muggers into an actual police force. Which is probably not a lot, since you are just one dude in a crooked system. But don't ever confront the armed mugger while he is mugging you, that is just gonna get you shot. Do it at any other time, when you are not in a traffic stop. There are two levels going on here: What to do in the actual situation while it is happening, and what to do outside of that situation to stop it from constantly happening. What you as an individual do just to not get shot at the moment is not a societal solution to the problem, it is a momentary stopgap to protect yourself. It is very shitty that you need one. You should not need one. But you currently do. Everyone should agree that that situation is utterly ridiculous and needs to be changed. Whoever doesn't is clearly insane. But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't protect yourself in the insane situation as best as possible, while trying to change it when you are safe.
There's not a Black American male above ~10 who hasn't heard all of that. Turns out victims are human too. Something about living under constant oppression and not having your rights recognized makes people irritable. I hear white Americans even started a war over it.
But again, that's part of the point. This case among others is an example of him doing what you describe and the cop still panicking and murdering him with no consequence and plenty of defenders.
Also no one is doing a damn thing to reform them or stop it from happening in the future and they don't think that's despicable, because they are far enough away from the consequences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
