|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
That's a dumbing down of that stance and shows you don't actually care to understand the different perspective. That or you are just disingenuous.
|
What exactly are the way diffrent circumstances, that you didn't create yourself during the last ~50 years?
And why shouldn't these "circumstances" be changed or not even be changeable?
|
Then make a better argument. Because all we hear is the number of deaths is not even relevant, it's so little. This discussion would be so much better if you could just own up to your stance that your perceived personal security is worth the overall increase in gun deaths. It's a normal stance. We all are willing to sacrifice some lifes to have a certain way of living. I am willing to accept that some muslim refugees take a knife and try to kill someone in Germany to let the million of other refugees live here in peace. And if someone tells me, the easiest way to protect from this is to not let any refugees into germany, i can simply say that i am willing to live with the consequences. But no gunproponent in this thread ever did this.
Not once one of them said, look, we know we would be safer with no guns at all, we just value our right to own them higher.
|
On August 07 2018 21:23 travis wrote:
That's a dumbing down of that stance and shows you don't actually care to understand the different perspective. That or you are just disingenuous.
one of his actual rebuttals for those 1000 deaths was "what if 1000 guys were killed by roaches? no one would give a shit then".
his rebuttal would probably still be false, but it does a good job of showing that he has no interest in changing the way things are in the US at the moment because it would be inconvenient to. lets wait until that stat goes up and then well rediscuss whether we care enough to make a change
by comparison, australia took action after the events of one major mass shooting. 35 dead was enough to make the government introduce laws without making excuses for "logistics" or whatever other excuse was brought up in this thread. sure, we may have gotten lucky that the laws were extremely effective even to this day, but here we have sst saying "the numbers arent high enough" and would rather argue semantics about the inconveniences of implementation.
|
On August 07 2018 22:33 evilfatsh1t wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2018 21:23 travis wrote:
That's a dumbing down of that stance and shows you don't actually care to understand the different perspective. That or you are just disingenuous. one of his actual rebuttals for those 1000 deaths was "what if 1000 guys were killed by roaches? no one would give a shit then". his rebuttal would probably still be false, but it does a good job of showing that he has no interest in changing the way things are in the US at the moment because it would be inconvenient to. lets wait until that stat goes up and then well rediscuss whether we care enough to make a change
Pretty much. Apparently this needs to happen more often than bicycle accidents, tornadoes, cockroaches, etc etc before we can say that it happens "frequently"
|
The thing is though, is that for the sole example that is relevant to UK, (don't really get tornadoes or cockroaches or that many people killed by police), the goverment has a massive amount of legislation and money and effort reducing cyclist deaths.
Also that he doesn't understand the difference between a homicide and an incident, but hey Trump said so, so it must be true.
|
On August 07 2018 22:42 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
The thing is though, is that for the sole example that is relevant to UK, (don't really get tornadoes or cockroaches or that many people killed by police), the goverment has a massive amount of legislation and money and effort reducing cyclist deaths.
Also that he doesn't understand the difference between a homicide and an incident, but hey Trump said so, so it must be true.
I don't really want to get sucked into all this but I'd say we'd have to compare "gun-related deaths" to cyclists to even try to make this work and you still have the whole agent of the government potentially committing homicide vs (at worst) civilian vehicular homicides mixed in with accidents.
Drastically different issues at play beyond the body counts. That's not to say there isn't a point to US Democrats largely not being remotely helpful on this issue overall.
|
Well, I live in a modern developed government that views that if people die, it's partially a governance problem, that is to say that the government would be partially to blame through lack of action otherwise, so from the perspective of enlightment governance, the government is culpable if cyclists deaths occur unjustifiably due to lack of education and legislation and that extends to unjustified police killings.
Of course the situation in USA seems a bit different since the government seems to be indifferent at best and encouraging at worse. In either case, in modern (modern as in post 1800s enlightement era) values, your government would be considered culpable in the unjustified police killings.
|
United States44352 Posts
On August 07 2018 13:43 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2018 10:28 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 09:19 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:On August 07 2018 06:55 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 06:32 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 03:33 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 03:29 shabby wrote:
Having three people being shot by cops every day on average is pretty gross. The metric cant be the same for all things: having between 1 and 2 mass shootings every day in a country is not "statistically relevant" by your argument, so who cares, yet in other developed countries its practically unheard of - and its these you should compare with. Solving issues require you to look at evidence from an empirical standpoint. Stating that police officers kill people frequently would be statistically false. No where have I stated that there isn't a problem, rather the problem is not quite as large as made out to be. Your argument is intellectually disingenuous and utterly useless. The amount of citizens killed in this country by law enforcement is an absolute embarrassment when compared to peer nations, both absolute numbers and per capita. This is an empirical fact. Your argument is literally useless. Not only is it disingenuous, but it's correctness has no relevance to any discussion. Its only use is to try to trivialize this very real issue. You aren't being objective or empirical. You're being petty and partisan. How am I being disingenuous? It is a statistical fact that the number of people that die from police shootings is similar to the number of people that die from cycling. But I don't see people raising hell about cyclists getting hit by cars now do I? Did I deny that there aren't some unjustified police killings? No. I merely stated that you really can't use it as justification to take away firearms because it doesn't happen often enough to really warrant it. On August 07 2018 03:43 Plansix wrote:
I just want to point out that no one collects comprehensive data on the use of lethal force by the police. Many police departments do not report it or keep records. 1000 per year could be accurate or well below the true number.
And I don't want to be one of those 1000 people. More importantly, I don't want anyone I know to be shot by a dumb ass cop who gets scared for a minute. That number of 1000 comes from very liberal sources that arguably used methods that inflated the numbers. The FBI reports roughly 600-700, but let's just say for arguments sake that for whatever reason that all law enforcement agencies across the United States are reporting false numbers in some false conspiracy. Would you agree with me that the Washington Post is going to have some sort of liberal spin on how they do their work? I'd agree with that. And even then, they came up with about 1000. Now if I told you that cockroaches were killing a thousand people a year, and that we needed to come up with serious national reform in order to exterminate roaches, you'd look at me completely sideways, and justifiably so. And remember, not once did I deny that unjustified police killings do not occur, rather I pointed out correctly so that it does not happen as often as one would think. Someone earlier made a statement that police killings happen regularly, which essentially implies that they happen so frequently that it's just an every day occurrence. They then used that as one of many justifications to take away firearms. I merely pointed out that 1000 in 300 million isn't that common, and that you can't state that it happens 'regularly' because it statistically doesn't. The numbers don't bear out that fact. But instead of people agreeing that you know police officers aren't walking around just gunning random people in the street, I've got folks here moral high grounding here about the 'moral implications of the numbers' when I never even argued that point. All I ever stated was that police killings do not happen regularly, and the numbers bear that out. I think the disagreement here is over your definition of "regularly" Yes, tornadoes and bicycles and cockroaches and whatever else you wanna come up with probably kill as many people in a year as police shootings. the total deaths by police shooting in a year taken as a percentage of the population is not a high number. We get it. What everyone continues to throw back at you is the idea that this is an event that happens far more often here than it does in other developed nations. Furthermore this isn't a case of someone stepping on a rake or falling off a bicycle or whatever, these are horrifying instances of law enforcement killing people. Your comparisons to other statistical events are entirely out of context. They are not out of context at all, Simberto was the one who started the whole train of throwing random statistics out of the blue that have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Regularity implies that it happens frequently. Police shootings do not happen frequently. Just because country A. has more incidents than country B., does not mean that country A. has something that occurs frequently, it just occurs more often.The original statement was that police officers shoot unarmed civilians with regularity in the United States of America. That is the furthest thing from the truth, and all statistics bear out that fact. This has nothing to do with 'other countries.' It's statistically false to say that police shootings happen regularly in the United States, especially against unarmed people. You keep saying "all statistics bear this out" then that is simply not true. You can't even define what is regular to say that this isn't regular. I consider roughly 3 deaths a day "regular". And yes your stats are out of context because this is the institution that should be protecting our life actually taking it in quadruple digits yearly, as opposed to accidents or acts of nature. You just conveniently ignore the fact that EVERY peer nation has little to no problem with this issue. This contextualizes the fact that this occurs way too often and the fact that we have repeatedly pointed this out and you still ignore it shows your lack of integrity in this discussion. Every other peer nation also has dramatically different circumstances regarding their geography, socioeconomic make up, culture, and various other factors. Trying to just cross compare and just say "HEY LOOK WHY DOES IT WORK OVER HERE" is pretty dishonest in itself, but you seem very keen on doing that. 'Out of context' You're more likely to die from a bike accident then be shot and killed by a police officer. Unless your definition of regular also includes significant chances of getting hit by a force of nature and dying from it, I'd say that qualifies as 'not regular.' Like I said, some years there are more bike accident deaths then legally justified police homicide, I don't see people starting an entire bike safety movement. I'm not saying I don't recognize the problem; never stated that. I'm stating that the problem isn't quite as large as made out to be. It's not like it's an epidemic where police officers literally walk out into the street and just gun down whoever they want. Show nested quote +On August 07 2018 10:12 KwarK wrote:On August 07 2018 09:37 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 09:31 KwarK wrote:
Frequently isn’t an objective measure. The fact that one happened close enough for me to hear it is far more frequent than I’d like, coming from England. 1000 shootings in a year doesn't even come remotely close to qualifying as 'frequently'. If you call that frequently I am free to call the U.K. a hell hole where people knife each other left and right. Never heard anyone get stabbed in the UK. Just saying. I guess you must not read news regarding the UK very much. That was all the UK media was talking about for months. Show nested quote +On August 07 2018 10:10 Plansix wrote:
The government is killing 1000 citizens at year and their killers rare see the inside of a court room. But it isn’t worth discussing because the number is small.
Man, if we applied the same standards to the chances of the government taking people’s guns, the NRA sounds pretty stupid. And the vast majority of those are legally justified homicides along with the fact that the overwhelming majority were armed and confronting police officers. But that would require you to actually read the sources and go through the database before spewing a completely uninformed opinion. Mind you, unarmed doesn't necessarily mean 'not dangerous' either.
No, I literally never heard a guy get stabbed. As in the sound. Although if we’d want to make it more comparable it’d be never having heard a guy get fatally stabbed by the police. Whereas I have heard a guy get fatally shot by the police in the US.
|
On August 07 2018 21:05 evilfatsh1t wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2018 13:43 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 10:28 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 09:19 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:On August 07 2018 06:55 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 06:32 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 03:33 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 03:29 shabby wrote:
Having three people being shot by cops every day on average is pretty gross. The metric cant be the same for all things: having between 1 and 2 mass shootings every day in a country is not "statistically relevant" by your argument, so who cares, yet in other developed countries its practically unheard of - and its these you should compare with. Solving issues require you to look at evidence from an empirical standpoint. Stating that police officers kill people frequently would be statistically false. No where have I stated that there isn't a problem, rather the problem is not quite as large as made out to be. Your argument is intellectually disingenuous and utterly useless. The amount of citizens killed in this country by law enforcement is an absolute embarrassment when compared to peer nations, both absolute numbers and per capita. This is an empirical fact. Your argument is literally useless. Not only is it disingenuous, but it's correctness has no relevance to any discussion. Its only use is to try to trivialize this very real issue. You aren't being objective or empirical. You're being petty and partisan. How am I being disingenuous? It is a statistical fact that the number of people that die from police shootings is similar to the number of people that die from cycling. But I don't see people raising hell about cyclists getting hit by cars now do I? Did I deny that there aren't some unjustified police killings? No. I merely stated that you really can't use it as justification to take away firearms because it doesn't happen often enough to really warrant it. On August 07 2018 03:43 Plansix wrote:
I just want to point out that no one collects comprehensive data on the use of lethal force by the police. Many police departments do not report it or keep records. 1000 per year could be accurate or well below the true number.
And I don't want to be one of those 1000 people. More importantly, I don't want anyone I know to be shot by a dumb ass cop who gets scared for a minute. That number of 1000 comes from very liberal sources that arguably used methods that inflated the numbers. The FBI reports roughly 600-700, but let's just say for arguments sake that for whatever reason that all law enforcement agencies across the United States are reporting false numbers in some false conspiracy. Would you agree with me that the Washington Post is going to have some sort of liberal spin on how they do their work? I'd agree with that. And even then, they came up with about 1000. Now if I told you that cockroaches were killing a thousand people a year, and that we needed to come up with serious national reform in order to exterminate roaches, you'd look at me completely sideways, and justifiably so. And remember, not once did I deny that unjustified police killings do not occur, rather I pointed out correctly so that it does not happen as often as one would think. Someone earlier made a statement that police killings happen regularly, which essentially implies that they happen so frequently that it's just an every day occurrence. They then used that as one of many justifications to take away firearms. I merely pointed out that 1000 in 300 million isn't that common, and that you can't state that it happens 'regularly' because it statistically doesn't. The numbers don't bear out that fact. But instead of people agreeing that you know police officers aren't walking around just gunning random people in the street, I've got folks here moral high grounding here about the 'moral implications of the numbers' when I never even argued that point. All I ever stated was that police killings do not happen regularly, and the numbers bear that out. I think the disagreement here is over your definition of "regularly" Yes, tornadoes and bicycles and cockroaches and whatever else you wanna come up with probably kill as many people in a year as police shootings. the total deaths by police shooting in a year taken as a percentage of the population is not a high number. We get it. What everyone continues to throw back at you is the idea that this is an event that happens far more often here than it does in other developed nations. Furthermore this isn't a case of someone stepping on a rake or falling off a bicycle or whatever, these are horrifying instances of law enforcement killing people. Your comparisons to other statistical events are entirely out of context. They are not out of context at all, Simberto was the one who started the whole train of throwing random statistics out of the blue that have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Regularity implies that it happens frequently. Police shootings do not happen frequently. Just because country A. has more incidents than country B., does not mean that country A. has something that occurs frequently, it just occurs more often.The original statement was that police officers shoot unarmed civilians with regularity in the United States of America. That is the furthest thing from the truth, and all statistics bear out that fact. This has nothing to do with 'other countries.' It's statistically false to say that police shootings happen regularly in the United States, especially against unarmed people. You keep saying "all statistics bear this out" then that is simply not true. You can't even define what is regular to say that this isn't regular. I consider roughly 3 deaths a day "regular". And yes your stats are out of context because this is the institution that should be protecting our life actually taking it in quadruple digits yearly, as opposed to accidents or acts of nature. You just conveniently ignore the fact that EVERY peer nation has little to no problem with this issue. This contextualizes the fact that this occurs way too often and the fact that we have repeatedly pointed this out and you still ignore it shows your lack of integrity in this discussion. Every other peer nation also has dramatically different circumstances regarding their geography, socioeconomic make up, culture, and various other factors. Trying to just cross compare and just say "HEY LOOK WHY DOES IT WORK OVER HERE" is pretty dishonest in itself, but you seem very keen on doing that. so....youre saying "1000 deaths is acceptable in the US because this is just how we are. deal with it" i say this so many times in this thread, but its impossible to convince guys like sst when their entire stance on the matter is "not enough people are dying for me to give a fuck"
Please point to a single post to where I said I don't recognize that it isn't a problem. Because that's not actually what I said.
What I stated was that there is clearly a severe overreaction to how law enforcement handle situations, especially considering that the numbers statistically demonstrate that in the vast majority of police encounters, most people don't end up dead. There's something like 10 millionish arrests per a year give or take a few depending on the year. Maybe a thousand people (and that's on a high end, I'd trust how the FBI gathers statistics, but for arguments sake let's just use the Washington Post's database) at best are shot and killed by police officers. The vast majority of those 1000 are ARMED, not unarmed.
Source for arrest numbers : https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/persons-arrested/persons-arrested
Source for shooting database : https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/
Remember the ORIGINAL post was about how police officers REGULARLY shoot UNARMED civilians. The statistical facts do not bear that out. Alot of my other points in regards to cycling, roaches, and force of nature is to demonstrate that you guys seemingly don't actually care about a whole lot of other things at all, but feel compelled to vilify gun culture in the United States of America for some reason.
|
On August 08 2018 04:09 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2018 21:05 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 07 2018 13:43 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 10:28 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 09:19 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:On August 07 2018 06:55 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 06:32 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 03:33 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 03:29 shabby wrote:
Having three people being shot by cops every day on average is pretty gross. The metric cant be the same for all things: having between 1 and 2 mass shootings every day in a country is not "statistically relevant" by your argument, so who cares, yet in other developed countries its practically unheard of - and its these you should compare with. Solving issues require you to look at evidence from an empirical standpoint. Stating that police officers kill people frequently would be statistically false. No where have I stated that there isn't a problem, rather the problem is not quite as large as made out to be. Your argument is intellectually disingenuous and utterly useless. The amount of citizens killed in this country by law enforcement is an absolute embarrassment when compared to peer nations, both absolute numbers and per capita. This is an empirical fact. Your argument is literally useless. Not only is it disingenuous, but it's correctness has no relevance to any discussion. Its only use is to try to trivialize this very real issue. You aren't being objective or empirical. You're being petty and partisan. How am I being disingenuous? It is a statistical fact that the number of people that die from police shootings is similar to the number of people that die from cycling. But I don't see people raising hell about cyclists getting hit by cars now do I? Did I deny that there aren't some unjustified police killings? No. I merely stated that you really can't use it as justification to take away firearms because it doesn't happen often enough to really warrant it. On August 07 2018 03:43 Plansix wrote:
I just want to point out that no one collects comprehensive data on the use of lethal force by the police. Many police departments do not report it or keep records. 1000 per year could be accurate or well below the true number.
And I don't want to be one of those 1000 people. More importantly, I don't want anyone I know to be shot by a dumb ass cop who gets scared for a minute. That number of 1000 comes from very liberal sources that arguably used methods that inflated the numbers. The FBI reports roughly 600-700, but let's just say for arguments sake that for whatever reason that all law enforcement agencies across the United States are reporting false numbers in some false conspiracy. Would you agree with me that the Washington Post is going to have some sort of liberal spin on how they do their work? I'd agree with that. And even then, they came up with about 1000. Now if I told you that cockroaches were killing a thousand people a year, and that we needed to come up with serious national reform in order to exterminate roaches, you'd look at me completely sideways, and justifiably so. And remember, not once did I deny that unjustified police killings do not occur, rather I pointed out correctly so that it does not happen as often as one would think. Someone earlier made a statement that police killings happen regularly, which essentially implies that they happen so frequently that it's just an every day occurrence. They then used that as one of many justifications to take away firearms. I merely pointed out that 1000 in 300 million isn't that common, and that you can't state that it happens 'regularly' because it statistically doesn't. The numbers don't bear out that fact. But instead of people agreeing that you know police officers aren't walking around just gunning random people in the street, I've got folks here moral high grounding here about the 'moral implications of the numbers' when I never even argued that point. All I ever stated was that police killings do not happen regularly, and the numbers bear that out. I think the disagreement here is over your definition of "regularly" Yes, tornadoes and bicycles and cockroaches and whatever else you wanna come up with probably kill as many people in a year as police shootings. the total deaths by police shooting in a year taken as a percentage of the population is not a high number. We get it. What everyone continues to throw back at you is the idea that this is an event that happens far more often here than it does in other developed nations. Furthermore this isn't a case of someone stepping on a rake or falling off a bicycle or whatever, these are horrifying instances of law enforcement killing people. Your comparisons to other statistical events are entirely out of context. They are not out of context at all, Simberto was the one who started the whole train of throwing random statistics out of the blue that have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Regularity implies that it happens frequently. Police shootings do not happen frequently. Just because country A. has more incidents than country B., does not mean that country A. has something that occurs frequently, it just occurs more often.The original statement was that police officers shoot unarmed civilians with regularity in the United States of America. That is the furthest thing from the truth, and all statistics bear out that fact. This has nothing to do with 'other countries.' It's statistically false to say that police shootings happen regularly in the United States, especially against unarmed people. You keep saying "all statistics bear this out" then that is simply not true. You can't even define what is regular to say that this isn't regular. I consider roughly 3 deaths a day "regular". And yes your stats are out of context because this is the institution that should be protecting our life actually taking it in quadruple digits yearly, as opposed to accidents or acts of nature. You just conveniently ignore the fact that EVERY peer nation has little to no problem with this issue. This contextualizes the fact that this occurs way too often and the fact that we have repeatedly pointed this out and you still ignore it shows your lack of integrity in this discussion. Every other peer nation also has dramatically different circumstances regarding their geography, socioeconomic make up, culture, and various other factors. Trying to just cross compare and just say "HEY LOOK WHY DOES IT WORK OVER HERE" is pretty dishonest in itself, but you seem very keen on doing that. so....youre saying "1000 deaths is acceptable in the US because this is just how we are. deal with it" i say this so many times in this thread, but its impossible to convince guys like sst when their entire stance on the matter is "not enough people are dying for me to give a fuck" Please point to a single post to where I said I don't recognize that it isn't a problem. Because that's not actually what I said. What I stated was that there is clearly a severe overreaction to how law enforcement handle situations, especially considering that the numbers statistically demonstrate that in the vast majority of police encounters, most people don't end up dead. There's something like 10 millionish arrests per a year give or take a few depending on the year. Maybe a thousand people (and that's on a high end, I'd trust how the FBI gathers statistics, but for arguments sake let's just use the Washington Post's database) at best are shot and killed by police officers. The vast majority of those 1000 are ARMED, not unarmed. Source for arrest numbers : https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/persons-arrested/persons-arrestedSource for shooting database : https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/Remember the ORIGINAL post was about how police officers REGULARLY shoot UNARMED civilians. The statistical facts do not bear that out. Alot of my other points in regards to cycling, roaches, and force of nature is to demonstrate that you guys seemingly don't actually care about a whole lot of other things at all, but feel compelled to vilify gun culture in the United States of America for some reason.
Stop saying "the facts don't bear this out". You still can't define what "regular" is when several of us have told you we consider roughly 3 a day "regular"
For you to trivialize this like you keep trying to, you need to justify why police killing people is acceptable.
And the fact that you dont see safety initiatives for other issues just tells us that you're either blind or willfully ignorant. There are huge safety movements for cyclists, auto accidents, tornadoes, and all other manner of safety concerns in my community.
|
On August 08 2018 04:20 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 04:09 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 21:05 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 07 2018 13:43 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 10:28 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 09:19 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:On August 07 2018 06:55 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 06:32 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 03:33 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
Solving issues require you to look at evidence from an empirical standpoint. Stating that police officers kill people frequently would be statistically false. No where have I stated that there isn't a problem, rather the problem is not quite as large as made out to be. Your argument is intellectually disingenuous and utterly useless. The amount of citizens killed in this country by law enforcement is an absolute embarrassment when compared to peer nations, both absolute numbers and per capita. This is an empirical fact. Your argument is literally useless. Not only is it disingenuous, but it's correctness has no relevance to any discussion. Its only use is to try to trivialize this very real issue. You aren't being objective or empirical. You're being petty and partisan. How am I being disingenuous? It is a statistical fact that the number of people that die from police shootings is similar to the number of people that die from cycling. But I don't see people raising hell about cyclists getting hit by cars now do I? Did I deny that there aren't some unjustified police killings? No. I merely stated that you really can't use it as justification to take away firearms because it doesn't happen often enough to really warrant it. On August 07 2018 03:43 Plansix wrote:
I just want to point out that no one collects comprehensive data on the use of lethal force by the police. Many police departments do not report it or keep records. 1000 per year could be accurate or well below the true number.
And I don't want to be one of those 1000 people. More importantly, I don't want anyone I know to be shot by a dumb ass cop who gets scared for a minute. That number of 1000 comes from very liberal sources that arguably used methods that inflated the numbers. The FBI reports roughly 600-700, but let's just say for arguments sake that for whatever reason that all law enforcement agencies across the United States are reporting false numbers in some false conspiracy. Would you agree with me that the Washington Post is going to have some sort of liberal spin on how they do their work? I'd agree with that. And even then, they came up with about 1000. Now if I told you that cockroaches were killing a thousand people a year, and that we needed to come up with serious national reform in order to exterminate roaches, you'd look at me completely sideways, and justifiably so. And remember, not once did I deny that unjustified police killings do not occur, rather I pointed out correctly so that it does not happen as often as one would think. Someone earlier made a statement that police killings happen regularly, which essentially implies that they happen so frequently that it's just an every day occurrence. They then used that as one of many justifications to take away firearms. I merely pointed out that 1000 in 300 million isn't that common, and that you can't state that it happens 'regularly' because it statistically doesn't. The numbers don't bear out that fact. But instead of people agreeing that you know police officers aren't walking around just gunning random people in the street, I've got folks here moral high grounding here about the 'moral implications of the numbers' when I never even argued that point. All I ever stated was that police killings do not happen regularly, and the numbers bear that out. I think the disagreement here is over your definition of "regularly" Yes, tornadoes and bicycles and cockroaches and whatever else you wanna come up with probably kill as many people in a year as police shootings. the total deaths by police shooting in a year taken as a percentage of the population is not a high number. We get it. What everyone continues to throw back at you is the idea that this is an event that happens far more often here than it does in other developed nations. Furthermore this isn't a case of someone stepping on a rake or falling off a bicycle or whatever, these are horrifying instances of law enforcement killing people. Your comparisons to other statistical events are entirely out of context. They are not out of context at all, Simberto was the one who started the whole train of throwing random statistics out of the blue that have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Regularity implies that it happens frequently. Police shootings do not happen frequently. Just because country A. has more incidents than country B., does not mean that country A. has something that occurs frequently, it just occurs more often.The original statement was that police officers shoot unarmed civilians with regularity in the United States of America. That is the furthest thing from the truth, and all statistics bear out that fact. This has nothing to do with 'other countries.' It's statistically false to say that police shootings happen regularly in the United States, especially against unarmed people. You keep saying "all statistics bear this out" then that is simply not true. You can't even define what is regular to say that this isn't regular. I consider roughly 3 deaths a day "regular". And yes your stats are out of context because this is the institution that should be protecting our life actually taking it in quadruple digits yearly, as opposed to accidents or acts of nature. You just conveniently ignore the fact that EVERY peer nation has little to no problem with this issue. This contextualizes the fact that this occurs way too often and the fact that we have repeatedly pointed this out and you still ignore it shows your lack of integrity in this discussion. Every other peer nation also has dramatically different circumstances regarding their geography, socioeconomic make up, culture, and various other factors. Trying to just cross compare and just say "HEY LOOK WHY DOES IT WORK OVER HERE" is pretty dishonest in itself, but you seem very keen on doing that. so....youre saying "1000 deaths is acceptable in the US because this is just how we are. deal with it" i say this so many times in this thread, but its impossible to convince guys like sst when their entire stance on the matter is "not enough people are dying for me to give a fuck" Please point to a single post to where I said I don't recognize that it isn't a problem. Because that's not actually what I said. What I stated was that there is clearly a severe overreaction to how law enforcement handle situations, especially considering that the numbers statistically demonstrate that in the vast majority of police encounters, most people don't end up dead. There's something like 10 millionish arrests per a year give or take a few depending on the year. Maybe a thousand people (and that's on a high end, I'd trust how the FBI gathers statistics, but for arguments sake let's just use the Washington Post's database) at best are shot and killed by police officers. The vast majority of those 1000 are ARMED, not unarmed. Source for arrest numbers : https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/persons-arrested/persons-arrestedSource for shooting database : https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/Remember the ORIGINAL post was about how police officers REGULARLY shoot UNARMED civilians. The statistical facts do not bear that out. Alot of my other points in regards to cycling, roaches, and force of nature is to demonstrate that you guys seemingly don't actually care about a whole lot of other things at all, but feel compelled to vilify gun culture in the United States of America for some reason. Stop saying "the facts don't bear this out". You still can't define what "regular" is when several of us have told you we consider roughly 3 a day "regular" For you to trivialize this like you keep trying to, you need to justify why police killing people is prima facae acceptable.
How many unarmed people were shot and killed in 2017?
68.
About how many people are arrested on average per year?
10 million.
Are you saying that 68 out of 10 million is 'regular' or 'frequently occurring'? Because that was the original statement that our friend from Germany made, that police officers regularly shoot and kill unarmed civilians, particularly people of color (since he went on to elaborate further). If we filter it down to people of color, we reduce that number down to like 20 or 30 in a year.
Also just because someone is 'unarmed' does not mean said person isn't 'dangerous.' And remember, I've never once stated I don't recognize the problem; there is a problem. But it's greatly exaggerated by the media and the liberal left as though there needs to be a national reform on how police officers operate.
|
On August 08 2018 04:23 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 04:20 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 08 2018 04:09 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 21:05 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 07 2018 13:43 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 10:28 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 09:19 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:On August 07 2018 06:55 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 06:32 Stratos_speAr wrote:
[quote]
Your argument is intellectually disingenuous and utterly useless.
The amount of citizens killed in this country by law enforcement is an absolute embarrassment when compared to peer nations, both absolute numbers and per capita. This is an empirical fact.
Your argument is literally useless. Not only is it disingenuous, but it's correctness has no relevance to any discussion. Its only use is to try to trivialize this very real issue. You aren't being objective or empirical. You're being petty and partisan. How am I being disingenuous? It is a statistical fact that the number of people that die from police shootings is similar to the number of people that die from cycling. But I don't see people raising hell about cyclists getting hit by cars now do I? Did I deny that there aren't some unjustified police killings? No. I merely stated that you really can't use it as justification to take away firearms because it doesn't happen often enough to really warrant it. On August 07 2018 03:43 Plansix wrote:
I just want to point out that no one collects comprehensive data on the use of lethal force by the police. Many police departments do not report it or keep records. 1000 per year could be accurate or well below the true number.
And I don't want to be one of those 1000 people. More importantly, I don't want anyone I know to be shot by a dumb ass cop who gets scared for a minute. That number of 1000 comes from very liberal sources that arguably used methods that inflated the numbers. The FBI reports roughly 600-700, but let's just say for arguments sake that for whatever reason that all law enforcement agencies across the United States are reporting false numbers in some false conspiracy. Would you agree with me that the Washington Post is going to have some sort of liberal spin on how they do their work? I'd agree with that. And even then, they came up with about 1000. Now if I told you that cockroaches were killing a thousand people a year, and that we needed to come up with serious national reform in order to exterminate roaches, you'd look at me completely sideways, and justifiably so. And remember, not once did I deny that unjustified police killings do not occur, rather I pointed out correctly so that it does not happen as often as one would think. Someone earlier made a statement that police killings happen regularly, which essentially implies that they happen so frequently that it's just an every day occurrence. They then used that as one of many justifications to take away firearms. I merely pointed out that 1000 in 300 million isn't that common, and that you can't state that it happens 'regularly' because it statistically doesn't. The numbers don't bear out that fact. But instead of people agreeing that you know police officers aren't walking around just gunning random people in the street, I've got folks here moral high grounding here about the 'moral implications of the numbers' when I never even argued that point. All I ever stated was that police killings do not happen regularly, and the numbers bear that out. I think the disagreement here is over your definition of "regularly" Yes, tornadoes and bicycles and cockroaches and whatever else you wanna come up with probably kill as many people in a year as police shootings. the total deaths by police shooting in a year taken as a percentage of the population is not a high number. We get it. What everyone continues to throw back at you is the idea that this is an event that happens far more often here than it does in other developed nations. Furthermore this isn't a case of someone stepping on a rake or falling off a bicycle or whatever, these are horrifying instances of law enforcement killing people. Your comparisons to other statistical events are entirely out of context. They are not out of context at all, Simberto was the one who started the whole train of throwing random statistics out of the blue that have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Regularity implies that it happens frequently. Police shootings do not happen frequently. Just because country A. has more incidents than country B., does not mean that country A. has something that occurs frequently, it just occurs more often.The original statement was that police officers shoot unarmed civilians with regularity in the United States of America. That is the furthest thing from the truth, and all statistics bear out that fact. This has nothing to do with 'other countries.' It's statistically false to say that police shootings happen regularly in the United States, especially against unarmed people. You keep saying "all statistics bear this out" then that is simply not true. You can't even define what is regular to say that this isn't regular. I consider roughly 3 deaths a day "regular". And yes your stats are out of context because this is the institution that should be protecting our life actually taking it in quadruple digits yearly, as opposed to accidents or acts of nature. You just conveniently ignore the fact that EVERY peer nation has little to no problem with this issue. This contextualizes the fact that this occurs way too often and the fact that we have repeatedly pointed this out and you still ignore it shows your lack of integrity in this discussion. Every other peer nation also has dramatically different circumstances regarding their geography, socioeconomic make up, culture, and various other factors. Trying to just cross compare and just say "HEY LOOK WHY DOES IT WORK OVER HERE" is pretty dishonest in itself, but you seem very keen on doing that. so....youre saying "1000 deaths is acceptable in the US because this is just how we are. deal with it" i say this so many times in this thread, but its impossible to convince guys like sst when their entire stance on the matter is "not enough people are dying for me to give a fuck" Please point to a single post to where I said I don't recognize that it isn't a problem. Because that's not actually what I said. What I stated was that there is clearly a severe overreaction to how law enforcement handle situations, especially considering that the numbers statistically demonstrate that in the vast majority of police encounters, most people don't end up dead. There's something like 10 millionish arrests per a year give or take a few depending on the year. Maybe a thousand people (and that's on a high end, I'd trust how the FBI gathers statistics, but for arguments sake let's just use the Washington Post's database) at best are shot and killed by police officers. The vast majority of those 1000 are ARMED, not unarmed. Source for arrest numbers : https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/persons-arrested/persons-arrestedSource for shooting database : https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/Remember the ORIGINAL post was about how police officers REGULARLY shoot UNARMED civilians. The statistical facts do not bear that out. Alot of my other points in regards to cycling, roaches, and force of nature is to demonstrate that you guys seemingly don't actually care about a whole lot of other things at all, but feel compelled to vilify gun culture in the United States of America for some reason. Stop saying "the facts don't bear this out". You still can't define what "regular" is when several of us have told you we consider roughly 3 a day "regular" For you to trivialize this like you keep trying to, you need to justify why police killing people is prima facae acceptable. How many unarmed people were shot and killed in 2017? 68. About how many people are arrested on average per year? 10 million. Are you saying that 68 out of 10 million is 'regular' or 'frequently occurring'? Because that was the original statement that our friend from Germany made, that police officers regularly shoot and kill unarmed civilians, particularly people of color (since he went on to elaborate further). If we filter it down to people of color, we reduce that number down to like 20 or 30 in a year. Also just because someone is 'unarmed' does not mean said person isn't 'dangerous.' And remember, I've never once stated I don't recognize the problem; there is a problem. But it's greatly exaggerated by the media and the liberal left as though there needs to be a national reform on how police officers operate.
There does need to be a national reform on how police operate.
The incompetence, racism, abuse, and corruption of police nationwide is EXTREMELY well documented, to the point where if you deny the problem then your opinion just doesn't have much value because you're essentially sticking your head in the sand and can't be taken seriously.
Do I think 68 out of 10 million is too much? Absolutely, because the state sanctioned killing of individuals shouldn't be acceptable except for the most heinous circumstances. Using the excuses of "We're a different country, different context, yadayadayada" is just a lazy excuse used by people to justify doing nothing when it is objectively clear that our country is terrible at something compared to other countries that do it better. It's an excuse used by those that benefit from or aren't hurt by the problem and are too lazy or selfish to fix it. See: welfare programs, health care, gun deaths, education, the environment, etc.
|
On August 08 2018 04:33 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 04:23 superstartran wrote:On August 08 2018 04:20 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 08 2018 04:09 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 21:05 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 07 2018 13:43 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 10:28 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 09:19 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:On August 07 2018 06:55 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
How am I being disingenuous? It is a statistical fact that the number of people that die from police shootings is similar to the number of people that die from cycling. But I don't see people raising hell about cyclists getting hit by cars now do I? Did I deny that there aren't some unjustified police killings? No. I merely stated that you really can't use it as justification to take away firearms because it doesn't happen often enough to really warrant it.
[quote]
That number of 1000 comes from very liberal sources that arguably used methods that inflated the numbers. The FBI reports roughly 600-700, but let's just say for arguments sake that for whatever reason that all law enforcement agencies across the United States are reporting false numbers in some false conspiracy.
Would you agree with me that the Washington Post is going to have some sort of liberal spin on how they do their work? I'd agree with that. And even then, they came up with about 1000. Now if I told you that cockroaches were killing a thousand people a year, and that we needed to come up with serious national reform in order to exterminate roaches, you'd look at me completely sideways, and justifiably so.
And remember, not once did I deny that unjustified police killings do not occur, rather I pointed out correctly so that it does not happen as often as one would think. Someone earlier made a statement that police killings happen regularly, which essentially implies that they happen so frequently that it's just an every day occurrence. They then used that as one of many justifications to take away firearms. I merely pointed out that 1000 in 300 million isn't that common, and that you can't state that it happens 'regularly' because it statistically doesn't. The numbers don't bear out that fact.
But instead of people agreeing that you know police officers aren't walking around just gunning random people in the street, I've got folks here moral high grounding here about the 'moral implications of the numbers' when I never even argued that point. All I ever stated was that police killings do not happen regularly, and the numbers bear that out.
I think the disagreement here is over your definition of "regularly" Yes, tornadoes and bicycles and cockroaches and whatever else you wanna come up with probably kill as many people in a year as police shootings. the total deaths by police shooting in a year taken as a percentage of the population is not a high number. We get it. What everyone continues to throw back at you is the idea that this is an event that happens far more often here than it does in other developed nations. Furthermore this isn't a case of someone stepping on a rake or falling off a bicycle or whatever, these are horrifying instances of law enforcement killing people. Your comparisons to other statistical events are entirely out of context. They are not out of context at all, Simberto was the one who started the whole train of throwing random statistics out of the blue that have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Regularity implies that it happens frequently. Police shootings do not happen frequently. Just because country A. has more incidents than country B., does not mean that country A. has something that occurs frequently, it just occurs more often.The original statement was that police officers shoot unarmed civilians with regularity in the United States of America. That is the furthest thing from the truth, and all statistics bear out that fact. This has nothing to do with 'other countries.' It's statistically false to say that police shootings happen regularly in the United States, especially against unarmed people. You keep saying "all statistics bear this out" then that is simply not true. You can't even define what is regular to say that this isn't regular. I consider roughly 3 deaths a day "regular". And yes your stats are out of context because this is the institution that should be protecting our life actually taking it in quadruple digits yearly, as opposed to accidents or acts of nature. You just conveniently ignore the fact that EVERY peer nation has little to no problem with this issue. This contextualizes the fact that this occurs way too often and the fact that we have repeatedly pointed this out and you still ignore it shows your lack of integrity in this discussion. Every other peer nation also has dramatically different circumstances regarding their geography, socioeconomic make up, culture, and various other factors. Trying to just cross compare and just say "HEY LOOK WHY DOES IT WORK OVER HERE" is pretty dishonest in itself, but you seem very keen on doing that. so....youre saying "1000 deaths is acceptable in the US because this is just how we are. deal with it" i say this so many times in this thread, but its impossible to convince guys like sst when their entire stance on the matter is "not enough people are dying for me to give a fuck" Please point to a single post to where I said I don't recognize that it isn't a problem. Because that's not actually what I said. What I stated was that there is clearly a severe overreaction to how law enforcement handle situations, especially considering that the numbers statistically demonstrate that in the vast majority of police encounters, most people don't end up dead. There's something like 10 millionish arrests per a year give or take a few depending on the year. Maybe a thousand people (and that's on a high end, I'd trust how the FBI gathers statistics, but for arguments sake let's just use the Washington Post's database) at best are shot and killed by police officers. The vast majority of those 1000 are ARMED, not unarmed. Source for arrest numbers : https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/persons-arrested/persons-arrestedSource for shooting database : https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/Remember the ORIGINAL post was about how police officers REGULARLY shoot UNARMED civilians. The statistical facts do not bear that out. Alot of my other points in regards to cycling, roaches, and force of nature is to demonstrate that you guys seemingly don't actually care about a whole lot of other things at all, but feel compelled to vilify gun culture in the United States of America for some reason. Stop saying "the facts don't bear this out". You still can't define what "regular" is when several of us have told you we consider roughly 3 a day "regular" For you to trivialize this like you keep trying to, you need to justify why police killing people is prima facae acceptable. How many unarmed people were shot and killed in 2017? 68. About how many people are arrested on average per year? 10 million. Are you saying that 68 out of 10 million is 'regular' or 'frequently occurring'? Because that was the original statement that our friend from Germany made, that police officers regularly shoot and kill unarmed civilians, particularly people of color (since he went on to elaborate further). If we filter it down to people of color, we reduce that number down to like 20 or 30 in a year. Also just because someone is 'unarmed' does not mean said person isn't 'dangerous.' And remember, I've never once stated I don't recognize the problem; there is a problem. But it's greatly exaggerated by the media and the liberal left as though there needs to be a national reform on how police officers operate. There does need to be a national reform on how police operate. The incompetence, racism, abuse, and corruption of police nationwide is EXTREMELY well documented, to the point where if you deny the problem then your opinion just doesn't have much value because you're essentially sticking your head in the sand and can't be taken seriously. Do I think 68 out of 10 million is too much? Absolutely, because the state sanctioned killing of individuals shouldn't be acceptable except for the most heinous circumstances. Using the excuses of "We're a different country, different context, yadayadayada" is just a lazy excuse used by people to justify doing nothing when it is objectively clear that our country is terrible at something compared to other countries that do it better. It's an excuse used by those that benefit from or aren't hurt by the problem and are too lazy or selfish to fix it. See: welfare programs, health care, gun deaths, education, the environment, etc.
Do I think some police officers are corrupt? Sure. I do. Do I believe that some of them power trip? Obviously. Just like any job you will have bad apples. Is the vast majority of the police force like this? No, it's not. The vast majority of the police force does their job and does it because they want to protect and serve. And they do it while mostly getting underpaid for the amount of work they do. Making general sweeping statements about how police officers are terrible people sure isn't really going to help bring people to your cause.
Why did I point out those statistics? Because the liberal left and media paint out police officers nation wide as bad guys for some reason, as though using lethal force is completely unnecessary. Before you go on about how police officers are corrupt, I'd invite you to review a surprising study that demonstrates that police officers in fact don't use lethal force in a discriminatory fashion contrary to popular opinion.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html
Now to be fair, it also shows that police officers do tend to be abit more aggressive with blacks than whites. There's definitely a problem there. I've never disputed that. But what I do dispute is this asinine idea that police officers just walk around and just shoot people on a whim. If you know someone who works in law enforcement, or you have worked in law enforcement, you know that discharging your firearm leads to a metric ton of paperwork, a lengthy investigation, among many other things. Justifiably so to. So when a police officer discharges his weapon, typically he or she is damn sure that it needed to be done.
Also for those of you who believe that police officers don't need guns, please refer to this video. This is from the perspective of a police officer when it comes to the use of tazers and why it's not always the proper tool for the situation. Go to 3:07 to see it
+ Show Spoiler +
To see a real world example of this, you can watch this video below where a police officer attempts to subdue a suspect with a tazer, the suspect is unarmed, does not cooperate, and the police officer is forced to use deadly force to subdue the suspect.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On August 08 2018 04:56 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 04:33 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 08 2018 04:23 superstartran wrote:On August 08 2018 04:20 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 08 2018 04:09 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 21:05 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 07 2018 13:43 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 10:28 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 09:19 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
[quote]
I think the disagreement here is over your definition of "regularly"
Yes, tornadoes and bicycles and cockroaches and whatever else you wanna come up with probably kill as many people in a year as police shootings. the total deaths by police shooting in a year taken as a percentage of the population is not a high number. We get it.
What everyone continues to throw back at you is the idea that this is an event that happens far more often here than it does in other developed nations. Furthermore this isn't a case of someone stepping on a rake or falling off a bicycle or whatever, these are horrifying instances of law enforcement killing people.
Your comparisons to other statistical events are entirely out of context. They are not out of context at all, Simberto was the one who started the whole train of throwing random statistics out of the blue that have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Regularity implies that it happens frequently. Police shootings do not happen frequently. Just because country A. has more incidents than country B., does not mean that country A. has something that occurs frequently, it just occurs more often.The original statement was that police officers shoot unarmed civilians with regularity in the United States of America. That is the furthest thing from the truth, and all statistics bear out that fact. This has nothing to do with 'other countries.' It's statistically false to say that police shootings happen regularly in the United States, especially against unarmed people. You keep saying "all statistics bear this out" then that is simply not true. You can't even define what is regular to say that this isn't regular. I consider roughly 3 deaths a day "regular". And yes your stats are out of context because this is the institution that should be protecting our life actually taking it in quadruple digits yearly, as opposed to accidents or acts of nature. You just conveniently ignore the fact that EVERY peer nation has little to no problem with this issue. This contextualizes the fact that this occurs way too often and the fact that we have repeatedly pointed this out and you still ignore it shows your lack of integrity in this discussion. Every other peer nation also has dramatically different circumstances regarding their geography, socioeconomic make up, culture, and various other factors. Trying to just cross compare and just say "HEY LOOK WHY DOES IT WORK OVER HERE" is pretty dishonest in itself, but you seem very keen on doing that. so....youre saying "1000 deaths is acceptable in the US because this is just how we are. deal with it" i say this so many times in this thread, but its impossible to convince guys like sst when their entire stance on the matter is "not enough people are dying for me to give a fuck" Please point to a single post to where I said I don't recognize that it isn't a problem. Because that's not actually what I said. What I stated was that there is clearly a severe overreaction to how law enforcement handle situations, especially considering that the numbers statistically demonstrate that in the vast majority of police encounters, most people don't end up dead. There's something like 10 millionish arrests per a year give or take a few depending on the year. Maybe a thousand people (and that's on a high end, I'd trust how the FBI gathers statistics, but for arguments sake let's just use the Washington Post's database) at best are shot and killed by police officers. The vast majority of those 1000 are ARMED, not unarmed. Source for arrest numbers : https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/persons-arrested/persons-arrestedSource for shooting database : https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/Remember the ORIGINAL post was about how police officers REGULARLY shoot UNARMED civilians. The statistical facts do not bear that out. Alot of my other points in regards to cycling, roaches, and force of nature is to demonstrate that you guys seemingly don't actually care about a whole lot of other things at all, but feel compelled to vilify gun culture in the United States of America for some reason. Stop saying "the facts don't bear this out". You still can't define what "regular" is when several of us have told you we consider roughly 3 a day "regular" For you to trivialize this like you keep trying to, you need to justify why police killing people is prima facae acceptable. How many unarmed people were shot and killed in 2017? 68. About how many people are arrested on average per year? 10 million. Are you saying that 68 out of 10 million is 'regular' or 'frequently occurring'? Because that was the original statement that our friend from Germany made, that police officers regularly shoot and kill unarmed civilians, particularly people of color (since he went on to elaborate further). If we filter it down to people of color, we reduce that number down to like 20 or 30 in a year. Also just because someone is 'unarmed' does not mean said person isn't 'dangerous.' And remember, I've never once stated I don't recognize the problem; there is a problem. But it's greatly exaggerated by the media and the liberal left as though there needs to be a national reform on how police officers operate. There does need to be a national reform on how police operate. The incompetence, racism, abuse, and corruption of police nationwide is EXTREMELY well documented, to the point where if you deny the problem then your opinion just doesn't have much value because you're essentially sticking your head in the sand and can't be taken seriously. Do I think 68 out of 10 million is too much? Absolutely, because the state sanctioned killing of individuals shouldn't be acceptable except for the most heinous circumstances. Using the excuses of "We're a different country, different context, yadayadayada" is just a lazy excuse used by people to justify doing nothing when it is objectively clear that our country is terrible at something compared to other countries that do it better. It's an excuse used by those that benefit from or aren't hurt by the problem and are too lazy or selfish to fix it. See: welfare programs, health care, gun deaths, education, the environment, etc. Do I think some police officers are corrupt? Sure. I do. Do I believe that some of them power trip? Obviously. Just like any job you will have bad apples. Is the vast majority of the police force like this? No, it's not. The vast majority of the police force does their job and does it because they want to protect and serve. And they do it while mostly getting underpaid for the amount of work they do. Making general sweeping statements about how police officers are terrible people sure isn't really going to help bring people to your cause. Why did I point out those statistics? Because the liberal left and media paint out police officers nation wide as bad guys for some reason, as though using lethal force is completely unnecessary. Before you go on about how police officers are corrupt, I'd invite you to review a surprising study that demonstrates that police officers in fact don't use lethal force indiscriminately. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.htmlNow to be fair, it also shows that police officers do tend to be abit more aggressive with blacks than whites. There's definitely a problem there. I've never disputed that. But what I do dispute is this asinine idea that police officers just walk around and just shoot people on a whim. If you know someone who works in law enforcement, or you have worked in law enforcement, you know that discharging your firearm leads to a metric ton of paperwork, a lengthy investigation, among many other things. Justifiably so to. So when a police officer discharges his weapon, typically he or she is damn sure that it needed to be done. Also for those of you who believe that police officers don't need guns, please refer to this video. This is from the perspective of a police officer when it comes to the use of tazers and why it's not always the proper tool for the situation. Go to 3:07 to see it + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIQ3A7uWxzU To see a real world example of this, you can watch this video below where a police officer attempts to subdue a suspect with a tazer, the suspect is unarmed, does not cooperate, and the police officer is forced to use deadly force to subdue the suspect. + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqGsWtz5LCY
Ever heard about bad apples and spoiling..?
|
On August 08 2018 04:23 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 04:20 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 08 2018 04:09 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 21:05 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 07 2018 13:43 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 10:28 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 09:19 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:On August 07 2018 06:55 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 06:32 Stratos_speAr wrote:
[quote]
Your argument is intellectually disingenuous and utterly useless.
The amount of citizens killed in this country by law enforcement is an absolute embarrassment when compared to peer nations, both absolute numbers and per capita. This is an empirical fact.
Your argument is literally useless. Not only is it disingenuous, but it's correctness has no relevance to any discussion. Its only use is to try to trivialize this very real issue. You aren't being objective or empirical. You're being petty and partisan. How am I being disingenuous? It is a statistical fact that the number of people that die from police shootings is similar to the number of people that die from cycling. But I don't see people raising hell about cyclists getting hit by cars now do I? Did I deny that there aren't some unjustified police killings? No. I merely stated that you really can't use it as justification to take away firearms because it doesn't happen often enough to really warrant it. On August 07 2018 03:43 Plansix wrote:
I just want to point out that no one collects comprehensive data on the use of lethal force by the police. Many police departments do not report it or keep records. 1000 per year could be accurate or well below the true number.
And I don't want to be one of those 1000 people. More importantly, I don't want anyone I know to be shot by a dumb ass cop who gets scared for a minute. That number of 1000 comes from very liberal sources that arguably used methods that inflated the numbers. The FBI reports roughly 600-700, but let's just say for arguments sake that for whatever reason that all law enforcement agencies across the United States are reporting false numbers in some false conspiracy. Would you agree with me that the Washington Post is going to have some sort of liberal spin on how they do their work? I'd agree with that. And even then, they came up with about 1000. Now if I told you that cockroaches were killing a thousand people a year, and that we needed to come up with serious national reform in order to exterminate roaches, you'd look at me completely sideways, and justifiably so. And remember, not once did I deny that unjustified police killings do not occur, rather I pointed out correctly so that it does not happen as often as one would think. Someone earlier made a statement that police killings happen regularly, which essentially implies that they happen so frequently that it's just an every day occurrence. They then used that as one of many justifications to take away firearms. I merely pointed out that 1000 in 300 million isn't that common, and that you can't state that it happens 'regularly' because it statistically doesn't. The numbers don't bear out that fact. But instead of people agreeing that you know police officers aren't walking around just gunning random people in the street, I've got folks here moral high grounding here about the 'moral implications of the numbers' when I never even argued that point. All I ever stated was that police killings do not happen regularly, and the numbers bear that out. I think the disagreement here is over your definition of "regularly" Yes, tornadoes and bicycles and cockroaches and whatever else you wanna come up with probably kill as many people in a year as police shootings. the total deaths by police shooting in a year taken as a percentage of the population is not a high number. We get it. What everyone continues to throw back at you is the idea that this is an event that happens far more often here than it does in other developed nations. Furthermore this isn't a case of someone stepping on a rake or falling off a bicycle or whatever, these are horrifying instances of law enforcement killing people. Your comparisons to other statistical events are entirely out of context. They are not out of context at all, Simberto was the one who started the whole train of throwing random statistics out of the blue that have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Regularity implies that it happens frequently. Police shootings do not happen frequently. Just because country A. has more incidents than country B., does not mean that country A. has something that occurs frequently, it just occurs more often.The original statement was that police officers shoot unarmed civilians with regularity in the United States of America. That is the furthest thing from the truth, and all statistics bear out that fact. This has nothing to do with 'other countries.' It's statistically false to say that police shootings happen regularly in the United States, especially against unarmed people. You keep saying "all statistics bear this out" then that is simply not true. You can't even define what is regular to say that this isn't regular. I consider roughly 3 deaths a day "regular". And yes your stats are out of context because this is the institution that should be protecting our life actually taking it in quadruple digits yearly, as opposed to accidents or acts of nature. You just conveniently ignore the fact that EVERY peer nation has little to no problem with this issue. This contextualizes the fact that this occurs way too often and the fact that we have repeatedly pointed this out and you still ignore it shows your lack of integrity in this discussion. Every other peer nation also has dramatically different circumstances regarding their geography, socioeconomic make up, culture, and various other factors. Trying to just cross compare and just say "HEY LOOK WHY DOES IT WORK OVER HERE" is pretty dishonest in itself, but you seem very keen on doing that. so....youre saying "1000 deaths is acceptable in the US because this is just how we are. deal with it" i say this so many times in this thread, but its impossible to convince guys like sst when their entire stance on the matter is "not enough people are dying for me to give a fuck" Please point to a single post to where I said I don't recognize that it isn't a problem. Because that's not actually what I said. What I stated was that there is clearly a severe overreaction to how law enforcement handle situations, especially considering that the numbers statistically demonstrate that in the vast majority of police encounters, most people don't end up dead. There's something like 10 millionish arrests per a year give or take a few depending on the year. Maybe a thousand people (and that's on a high end, I'd trust how the FBI gathers statistics, but for arguments sake let's just use the Washington Post's database) at best are shot and killed by police officers. The vast majority of those 1000 are ARMED, not unarmed. Source for arrest numbers : https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/persons-arrested/persons-arrestedSource for shooting database : https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/Remember the ORIGINAL post was about how police officers REGULARLY shoot UNARMED civilians. The statistical facts do not bear that out. Alot of my other points in regards to cycling, roaches, and force of nature is to demonstrate that you guys seemingly don't actually care about a whole lot of other things at all, but feel compelled to vilify gun culture in the United States of America for some reason. Stop saying "the facts don't bear this out". You still can't define what "regular" is when several of us have told you we consider roughly 3 a day "regular" For you to trivialize this like you keep trying to, you need to justify why police killing people is prima facae acceptable. How many unarmed people were shot and killed in 2017? 68. About how many people are arrested on average per year? 10 million. Are you saying that 68 out of 10 million is 'regular' or 'frequently occurring'? Because that was the original statement that our friend from Germany made, that police officers regularly shoot and kill unarmed civilians, particularly people of color (since he went on to elaborate further). If we filter it down to people of color, we reduce that number down to like 20 or 30 in a year. Also just because someone is 'unarmed' does not mean said person isn't 'dangerous.' And remember, I've never once stated I don't recognize the problem; there is a problem. But it's greatly exaggerated by the media and the liberal left as though there needs to be a national reform on how police officers operate.
You again talk about my post without actually engaging me. You keep engaging the strawman that you created from my argument instead of the argument i clarified to you several times. Again, i don't care if police killings are regular or frequently occuring. I only care about them happening. And as they do, it follows that all engagement of armed people have to result in preventable deaths.
It's a ridiculously easy argument to accept but for some reason you cannot do that, instead you keep telling everyone how foolish it is to call 68 occurances out of 10000000 regularly.
|
On August 08 2018 05:01 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 04:56 superstartran wrote:On August 08 2018 04:33 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 08 2018 04:23 superstartran wrote:On August 08 2018 04:20 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 08 2018 04:09 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 21:05 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 07 2018 13:43 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 10:28 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 09:19 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
They are not out of context at all, Simberto was the one who started the whole train of throwing random statistics out of the blue that have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion.
Regularity implies that it happens frequently. Police shootings do not happen frequently. Just because country A. has more incidents than country B., does not mean that country A. has something that occurs frequently, it just occurs more often.
The original statement was that police officers shoot unarmed civilians with regularity in the United States of America. That is the furthest thing from the truth, and all statistics bear out that fact. This has nothing to do with 'other countries.' It's statistically false to say that police shootings happen regularly in the United States, especially against unarmed people. You keep saying "all statistics bear this out" then that is simply not true. You can't even define what is regular to say that this isn't regular. I consider roughly 3 deaths a day "regular". And yes your stats are out of context because this is the institution that should be protecting our life actually taking it in quadruple digits yearly, as opposed to accidents or acts of nature. You just conveniently ignore the fact that EVERY peer nation has little to no problem with this issue. This contextualizes the fact that this occurs way too often and the fact that we have repeatedly pointed this out and you still ignore it shows your lack of integrity in this discussion. Every other peer nation also has dramatically different circumstances regarding their geography, socioeconomic make up, culture, and various other factors. Trying to just cross compare and just say "HEY LOOK WHY DOES IT WORK OVER HERE" is pretty dishonest in itself, but you seem very keen on doing that. so....youre saying "1000 deaths is acceptable in the US because this is just how we are. deal with it" i say this so many times in this thread, but its impossible to convince guys like sst when their entire stance on the matter is "not enough people are dying for me to give a fuck" Please point to a single post to where I said I don't recognize that it isn't a problem. Because that's not actually what I said. What I stated was that there is clearly a severe overreaction to how law enforcement handle situations, especially considering that the numbers statistically demonstrate that in the vast majority of police encounters, most people don't end up dead. There's something like 10 millionish arrests per a year give or take a few depending on the year. Maybe a thousand people (and that's on a high end, I'd trust how the FBI gathers statistics, but for arguments sake let's just use the Washington Post's database) at best are shot and killed by police officers. The vast majority of those 1000 are ARMED, not unarmed. Source for arrest numbers : https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/persons-arrested/persons-arrestedSource for shooting database : https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/Remember the ORIGINAL post was about how police officers REGULARLY shoot UNARMED civilians. The statistical facts do not bear that out. Alot of my other points in regards to cycling, roaches, and force of nature is to demonstrate that you guys seemingly don't actually care about a whole lot of other things at all, but feel compelled to vilify gun culture in the United States of America for some reason. Stop saying "the facts don't bear this out". You still can't define what "regular" is when several of us have told you we consider roughly 3 a day "regular" For you to trivialize this like you keep trying to, you need to justify why police killing people is prima facae acceptable. How many unarmed people were shot and killed in 2017? 68. About how many people are arrested on average per year? 10 million. Are you saying that 68 out of 10 million is 'regular' or 'frequently occurring'? Because that was the original statement that our friend from Germany made, that police officers regularly shoot and kill unarmed civilians, particularly people of color (since he went on to elaborate further). If we filter it down to people of color, we reduce that number down to like 20 or 30 in a year. Also just because someone is 'unarmed' does not mean said person isn't 'dangerous.' And remember, I've never once stated I don't recognize the problem; there is a problem. But it's greatly exaggerated by the media and the liberal left as though there needs to be a national reform on how police officers operate. There does need to be a national reform on how police operate. The incompetence, racism, abuse, and corruption of police nationwide is EXTREMELY well documented, to the point where if you deny the problem then your opinion just doesn't have much value because you're essentially sticking your head in the sand and can't be taken seriously. Do I think 68 out of 10 million is too much? Absolutely, because the state sanctioned killing of individuals shouldn't be acceptable except for the most heinous circumstances. Using the excuses of "We're a different country, different context, yadayadayada" is just a lazy excuse used by people to justify doing nothing when it is objectively clear that our country is terrible at something compared to other countries that do it better. It's an excuse used by those that benefit from or aren't hurt by the problem and are too lazy or selfish to fix it. See: welfare programs, health care, gun deaths, education, the environment, etc. Do I think some police officers are corrupt? Sure. I do. Do I believe that some of them power trip? Obviously. Just like any job you will have bad apples. Is the vast majority of the police force like this? No, it's not. The vast majority of the police force does their job and does it because they want to protect and serve. And they do it while mostly getting underpaid for the amount of work they do. Making general sweeping statements about how police officers are terrible people sure isn't really going to help bring people to your cause. Why did I point out those statistics? Because the liberal left and media paint out police officers nation wide as bad guys for some reason, as though using lethal force is completely unnecessary. Before you go on about how police officers are corrupt, I'd invite you to review a surprising study that demonstrates that police officers in fact don't use lethal force indiscriminately. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.htmlNow to be fair, it also shows that police officers do tend to be abit more aggressive with blacks than whites. There's definitely a problem there. I've never disputed that. But what I do dispute is this asinine idea that police officers just walk around and just shoot people on a whim. If you know someone who works in law enforcement, or you have worked in law enforcement, you know that discharging your firearm leads to a metric ton of paperwork, a lengthy investigation, among many other things. Justifiably so to. So when a police officer discharges his weapon, typically he or she is damn sure that it needed to be done. Also for those of you who believe that police officers don't need guns, please refer to this video. This is from the perspective of a police officer when it comes to the use of tazers and why it's not always the proper tool for the situation. Go to 3:07 to see it + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIQ3A7uWxzU To see a real world example of this, you can watch this video below where a police officer attempts to subdue a suspect with a tazer, the suspect is unarmed, does not cooperate, and the police officer is forced to use deadly force to subdue the suspect. + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqGsWtz5LCY Ever heard about bad apples and spoiling..?
So did you bother to read and watch the videos or are you just going to demonstrate your extreme bias on the matter? I've never disputed that we shouldn't prosecute bad cops. I've never disputed that there isn't a problem. What I have disputed is that there's some national conspiracy where police officers just choose to say "he's black i'm going to shoot him" and that the problem is rampant.
On August 08 2018 05:05 Broetchenholer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 04:23 superstartran wrote:On August 08 2018 04:20 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 08 2018 04:09 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 21:05 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 07 2018 13:43 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 10:28 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 07 2018 09:19 superstartran wrote:On August 07 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:On August 07 2018 06:55 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
How am I being disingenuous? It is a statistical fact that the number of people that die from police shootings is similar to the number of people that die from cycling. But I don't see people raising hell about cyclists getting hit by cars now do I? Did I deny that there aren't some unjustified police killings? No. I merely stated that you really can't use it as justification to take away firearms because it doesn't happen often enough to really warrant it.
[quote]
That number of 1000 comes from very liberal sources that arguably used methods that inflated the numbers. The FBI reports roughly 600-700, but let's just say for arguments sake that for whatever reason that all law enforcement agencies across the United States are reporting false numbers in some false conspiracy.
Would you agree with me that the Washington Post is going to have some sort of liberal spin on how they do their work? I'd agree with that. And even then, they came up with about 1000. Now if I told you that cockroaches were killing a thousand people a year, and that we needed to come up with serious national reform in order to exterminate roaches, you'd look at me completely sideways, and justifiably so.
And remember, not once did I deny that unjustified police killings do not occur, rather I pointed out correctly so that it does not happen as often as one would think. Someone earlier made a statement that police killings happen regularly, which essentially implies that they happen so frequently that it's just an every day occurrence. They then used that as one of many justifications to take away firearms. I merely pointed out that 1000 in 300 million isn't that common, and that you can't state that it happens 'regularly' because it statistically doesn't. The numbers don't bear out that fact.
But instead of people agreeing that you know police officers aren't walking around just gunning random people in the street, I've got folks here moral high grounding here about the 'moral implications of the numbers' when I never even argued that point. All I ever stated was that police killings do not happen regularly, and the numbers bear that out.
I think the disagreement here is over your definition of "regularly" Yes, tornadoes and bicycles and cockroaches and whatever else you wanna come up with probably kill as many people in a year as police shootings. the total deaths by police shooting in a year taken as a percentage of the population is not a high number. We get it. What everyone continues to throw back at you is the idea that this is an event that happens far more often here than it does in other developed nations. Furthermore this isn't a case of someone stepping on a rake or falling off a bicycle or whatever, these are horrifying instances of law enforcement killing people. Your comparisons to other statistical events are entirely out of context. They are not out of context at all, Simberto was the one who started the whole train of throwing random statistics out of the blue that have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Regularity implies that it happens frequently. Police shootings do not happen frequently. Just because country A. has more incidents than country B., does not mean that country A. has something that occurs frequently, it just occurs more often.The original statement was that police officers shoot unarmed civilians with regularity in the United States of America. That is the furthest thing from the truth, and all statistics bear out that fact. This has nothing to do with 'other countries.' It's statistically false to say that police shootings happen regularly in the United States, especially against unarmed people. You keep saying "all statistics bear this out" then that is simply not true. You can't even define what is regular to say that this isn't regular. I consider roughly 3 deaths a day "regular". And yes your stats are out of context because this is the institution that should be protecting our life actually taking it in quadruple digits yearly, as opposed to accidents or acts of nature. You just conveniently ignore the fact that EVERY peer nation has little to no problem with this issue. This contextualizes the fact that this occurs way too often and the fact that we have repeatedly pointed this out and you still ignore it shows your lack of integrity in this discussion. Every other peer nation also has dramatically different circumstances regarding their geography, socioeconomic make up, culture, and various other factors. Trying to just cross compare and just say "HEY LOOK WHY DOES IT WORK OVER HERE" is pretty dishonest in itself, but you seem very keen on doing that. so....youre saying "1000 deaths is acceptable in the US because this is just how we are. deal with it" i say this so many times in this thread, but its impossible to convince guys like sst when their entire stance on the matter is "not enough people are dying for me to give a fuck" Please point to a single post to where I said I don't recognize that it isn't a problem. Because that's not actually what I said. What I stated was that there is clearly a severe overreaction to how law enforcement handle situations, especially considering that the numbers statistically demonstrate that in the vast majority of police encounters, most people don't end up dead. There's something like 10 millionish arrests per a year give or take a few depending on the year. Maybe a thousand people (and that's on a high end, I'd trust how the FBI gathers statistics, but for arguments sake let's just use the Washington Post's database) at best are shot and killed by police officers. The vast majority of those 1000 are ARMED, not unarmed. Source for arrest numbers : https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/persons-arrested/persons-arrestedSource for shooting database : https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/Remember the ORIGINAL post was about how police officers REGULARLY shoot UNARMED civilians. The statistical facts do not bear that out. Alot of my other points in regards to cycling, roaches, and force of nature is to demonstrate that you guys seemingly don't actually care about a whole lot of other things at all, but feel compelled to vilify gun culture in the United States of America for some reason. Stop saying "the facts don't bear this out". You still can't define what "regular" is when several of us have told you we consider roughly 3 a day "regular" For you to trivialize this like you keep trying to, you need to justify why police killing people is prima facae acceptable. How many unarmed people were shot and killed in 2017? 68. About how many people are arrested on average per year? 10 million. Are you saying that 68 out of 10 million is 'regular' or 'frequently occurring'? Because that was the original statement that our friend from Germany made, that police officers regularly shoot and kill unarmed civilians, particularly people of color (since he went on to elaborate further). If we filter it down to people of color, we reduce that number down to like 20 or 30 in a year. Also just because someone is 'unarmed' does not mean said person isn't 'dangerous.' And remember, I've never once stated I don't recognize the problem; there is a problem. But it's greatly exaggerated by the media and the liberal left as though there needs to be a national reform on how police officers operate. You again talk about my post without actually engaging me. You keep engaging the strawman that you created from my argument instead of the argument i clarified to you several times. Again, i don't care if police killings are regular or frequently occuring. I only care about them happening. And as they do, it follows that all engagement of armed people have to result in preventable deaths. It's a ridiculously easy argument to accept but for some reason you cannot do that, instead you keep telling everyone how foolish it is to call 68 occurances out of 10000000 regularly.
What? Your original statement was that police officers regularly shoot unarmed people in the United States of America. That is simply not true. It does not happen frequently at all, and all numbers point to that. I've never disputed that some shootings are unjustified, nor have I ever disputed that some piss poor training leads to some bad decisions. But this idea that police officers just open fire and kill people randomly is what I dispute, because that's what you were insinuating in your original post.
If we went further down and filtered it out to people of color (because you were the one who brought it up), unarmed people of color actually don't get shot that often contrary to popular opinion.
Not once have I ever disputed some of the premise of your arguments, which that it is bad that police officers make poor decisions which lead to the loss of lives. That some police officers do choose to abuse their power. What I do dispute is the idea that it is incredibly rampant. All statistical facts point to the idea that police officers on average do not shoot unarmed people regularly.
|
Dude. Get it. It's not incredibly rampant. It's an issue that should be tackled. Get it.
Abuse of power is NOT GOOD. Do you get it now?
Misjudging the situation and reaching for lethal force way too quickly (or just reaching for lethal force way too quickly) is NOT GOOD and is an issue that needs to be tackled. The US is pathological in its refusal to address this issue properly. Do you get it now?
On August 08 2018 05:25 solidbebe wrote:
You guys dont even disagree all that much at this point youre just talking past each other lol
He keeps choosing that one statistical hill he wants to die on, but we're not addressing him on that. It's super obnoxious. If he keeps doing this I'll have to assume he's a troll.
|
You guys dont even disagree all that much at this point youre just talking past each other lol
|
On August 08 2018 05:25 Uldridge wrote:Dude. Get it. It's not incredibly rampant. It's an issue that should be tackled. Get it. Abuse of power is NOT GOOD. Do you get it now? Misjudging the situation and reaching for lethal force way too quickly (or just reaching for lethal force way too quickly) is NOT GOOD and is an issue that needs to be tackled. The US is pathological in its refusal to address this issue properly. Do you get it now? Show nested quote +On August 08 2018 05:25 solidbebe wrote:
You guys dont even disagree all that much at this point youre just talking past each other lol He keeps choosing that one statistical hill he wants to die on, but we're not addressing him on that. It's super obnoxious. If he keeps doing this I'll have to assume he's a troll.
More like there's zero rebuttal. The crux of his argument is that because police officers kill unarmed people with regularity in the United States, arming them would just make the situation worse.
Except, police officers statistically do not kill people regularly, especially unarmed civilians. So that pretty much invalidates his point in the first place.
Not to mention, his assumption is that unarmed civilians cannot be dangerous, which is categorically false as evidenced to the video I posted earlier where an unarmed suspect assaulted an officer who was trying to detain him. Criminals in generally don't play by the rules either (you know..... they are criminals). Why would you have to disarm private citizens if the private citizens as a whole generally are responsible? Do you unleash a bug bomb in your house because you saw one roach? No. You respond with solutions in proportion to the problem itself. I think gun violence is a problem in the United States, it's just not as big of a problem as people love to make it out to be. It can also be solved without having to take away people's guns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
