|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On April 15 2021 21:52 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2021 21:38 Biff The Understudy wrote:On April 15 2021 20:23 Sadist wrote:On April 15 2021 18:29 BlackJack wrote:On April 15 2021 18:21 Artisreal wrote:On April 15 2021 18:13 BlackJack wrote:On April 15 2021 18:00 Artisreal wrote:
I feel that you guys are missing an important caveat in the doctors vs police discussion.
Though I do not agree with the validity of the comparison, this might shed more light to the absurdity of the idea.
if you need an operation, you get a briefing of the risks and stuff and can opt out at any time and resort to touching crystals if that seems less risky to you compared to what otherwise would be the undertaking - removind the appendix, fixing a bone, whatever.
If you're a black person and get stopped by police for fuck all reason, there's no fucking chance to opt out. If that was a thing, therer wouldn't be as many murders by the police.
Imagine a traffic control where you have to consent to having a 5% chance of being shot for no good reason, i.e. your skin color. No fucking body would do that.
And exactly that is the point. If you had to consent to police brutality in the same way you have to regarding risks associated with health care, no fucking body would do that. So your argument is that people can opt out of healthcare and go home and die so that makes it less bad if a nurse or doctor kills them? I'll tell you a story of one of my former coworkers that once killed a patient. The gist of the story is that a patient needed to go to the bathroom but their dialysis catheter was hooked up to something. My former coworker disconnected the patient but when he did that he also removed the port to the catheter (essentially a valve that prevents backflow of blood). After the patient was in the bathroom for a while and was nonresponsive to knocks on the door they unlocked the door and found the patient in a pool of his own blood. Dead. Of course the dialysis patient needed dialysis 3 times a week or he would die but he always had the option to go home and touch crystals and die? My former coworker was a nice guy too, family man, invited me to his fantasy football league. This happened well before I ever worked with him. I'm sure he felt terrible over the whole thing. I think it's safe to assume he didn't lose his license since he was still working in the same hospital at the same job in the same department. No my argument is that they have agency over what happens to them. They are aware of the risks that even highly trained people make mistakes. Which are laid bare plainly. If you ask me, the mistake by your coworker is grave and should be prosecuted according to law. Which is ALL PEOPLE WANT FOR COPS! That they are bound by law. I don't see any contradiction here. Well in the case of Daunte Wright which started this discussion he certainly had agency to comply with the police and go to jail peacefully and there literally would have been zero chance of him being shot. The fact that he attempted to flee, resisted arrest, and initiated a scuffle is the only reason the cop had any reason to draw either her gun or her taser. I would like to think that anyone is aware of the risk that they might be shot anytime they decide to get into a scuffle with police. I agree with this. I dont think anyone would state that resisting arrest should be a death sentence, but at the same time if you play stupid games you win stupid prizes. Its a horrible situation for all that are involved but we all know this is a real possibility that this kind of stuff happens if you fight with someone that is armed (police, civilian, or otherwise). Its like walking in a bad neighborhood at night and getting mugged, is it the persons fault that they got mugged? Absolutely not. But at the same time a lesson learned could be to avoid sketchy areas after dark. Thats for self interest more than victim blaming. So when someone gets murdered by the cops it’s basically their fault because why did he resist arrest? Wow. Talk about victim blaming. You should be punished if you resist arrest. And a cop should be punished if he murders someone, regardless of what they were doing, including resisting arrest. A cop should be allowed lethal force if and only if his life or the life of someone is directly, clearly and immediately threatened. Every other account should be treated like any other case of a citizen murdering an other one. I mean it’s pretty basic really. Its not their fault they were murdered but they increase their odds substantially by fighting with a police officer and/or anyone thats armed. Even if the cop goes to jail for murder, you are still dead. Not discouraging resisting arrest is just dumb. Its not blaming the victim its trying to help them not be a victim. And yes I know that people have been killed when complying. Theres over 300 million people in the US you can find pretty much any situation occuring even if its low odds. That still doesnt mean you should knowingly increase your odds of being killed by fighting cops. Im all for police reform and holding people accountable but it also helps to not put yourself in a bad situation. Also the bolded is going to be a judgement call. You cant get away from that. Things arent black and white and you need to consider a ton of factors. Your statement doesnt magically solve these shootings.
Or maybe you change the way the police works and is held accountable and people don’t have to be careful to not get shot like dogs.
Your argument reminds me of the guy who say that if that girl didn’t wear a mini skirt she might not have gotten raped so it’s her responsibility to take the right steps not to get raped. In a state of law you should be able to commit a felony without fearing to get murdered. You should fear to get punished according to the law, not assassinated.
It’s so black and white in fact that in Western Europe, police randomely shooting people simply doesn’t happen. For a french policeman, shooting someone without being absolutely forced to do so is unthinkable. The french police kills between 10 and 15 people a year in total, the immense majority being clear cases of legitimate defense. And a lot of people are not complying. It’s just, police doesn’t shoot at them because it’s a fucking insane thing to do unless you are a complete psychopath.
|
On April 15 2021 22:44 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2021 22:36 StasisField wrote:
I can't believe people are still making the tired argument of "just don't resist and you'll be fine" after Daniel Shaver was gunned down on a hotel hallway floor, while he was lying there on the ground crying might I add, by a police officer who literally had "you're fucked" engraved on the side of his gun. The police are too trigger-happy in this country. That is not the fault of the citizens and to place the blame on them is just disgusting. You can find any situation if you look hard enough. That situation does not absolve people from resisting arrest anymore than one cop being killed allows police to shoot everyone.
Can you show me where in any of my posts on TeamLiquid where I stated people shouldn't be charged for resisting a lawful arrest? Because that's certainly not what I stated in my comment. Your response isn't related to what I said at all unless you seriously think that the correct way to punish someone for resisting arrest is to shoot them instead of just, ya know, finishing the arrest and charging them.
|
On April 15 2021 22:47 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2021 22:04 Sadist wrote:On April 15 2021 21:57 EnDeR_ wrote:On April 15 2021 21:52 Sadist wrote:On April 15 2021 21:38 Biff The Understudy wrote:On April 15 2021 20:23 Sadist wrote:On April 15 2021 18:29 BlackJack wrote:On April 15 2021 18:21 Artisreal wrote:On April 15 2021 18:13 BlackJack wrote:On April 15 2021 18:00 Artisreal wrote:
I feel that you guys are missing an important caveat in the doctors vs police discussion.
Though I do not agree with the validity of the comparison, this might shed more light to the absurdity of the idea.
if you need an operation, you get a briefing of the risks and stuff and can opt out at any time and resort to touching crystals if that seems less risky to you compared to what otherwise would be the undertaking - removind the appendix, fixing a bone, whatever.
If you're a black person and get stopped by police for fuck all reason, there's no fucking chance to opt out. If that was a thing, therer wouldn't be as many murders by the police.
Imagine a traffic control where you have to consent to having a 5% chance of being shot for no good reason, i.e. your skin color. No fucking body would do that.
And exactly that is the point. If you had to consent to police brutality in the same way you have to regarding risks associated with health care, no fucking body would do that. So your argument is that people can opt out of healthcare and go home and die so that makes it less bad if a nurse or doctor kills them? I'll tell you a story of one of my former coworkers that once killed a patient. The gist of the story is that a patient needed to go to the bathroom but their dialysis catheter was hooked up to something. My former coworker disconnected the patient but when he did that he also removed the port to the catheter (essentially a valve that prevents backflow of blood). After the patient was in the bathroom for a while and was nonresponsive to knocks on the door they unlocked the door and found the patient in a pool of his own blood. Dead. Of course the dialysis patient needed dialysis 3 times a week or he would die but he always had the option to go home and touch crystals and die? My former coworker was a nice guy too, family man, invited me to his fantasy football league. This happened well before I ever worked with him. I'm sure he felt terrible over the whole thing. I think it's safe to assume he didn't lose his license since he was still working in the same hospital at the same job in the same department. No my argument is that they have agency over what happens to them. They are aware of the risks that even highly trained people make mistakes. Which are laid bare plainly. If you ask me, the mistake by your coworker is grave and should be prosecuted according to law. Which is ALL PEOPLE WANT FOR COPS! That they are bound by law. I don't see any contradiction here. Well in the case of Daunte Wright which started this discussion he certainly had agency to comply with the police and go to jail peacefully and there literally would have been zero chance of him being shot. The fact that he attempted to flee, resisted arrest, and initiated a scuffle is the only reason the cop had any reason to draw either her gun or her taser. I would like to think that anyone is aware of the risk that they might be shot anytime they decide to get into a scuffle with police. I agree with this. I dont think anyone would state that resisting arrest should be a death sentence, but at the same time if you play stupid games you win stupid prizes. Its a horrible situation for all that are involved but we all know this is a real possibility that this kind of stuff happens if you fight with someone that is armed (police, civilian, or otherwise). Its like walking in a bad neighborhood at night and getting mugged, is it the persons fault that they got mugged? Absolutely not. But at the same time a lesson learned could be to avoid sketchy areas after dark. Thats for self interest more than victim blaming. So when someone gets murdered by the cops it’s basically their fault because why did he resist arrest? Wow. Talk about victim blaming. You should be punished if you resist arrest. And a cop should be punished if he murders someone, regardless of what they were doing, including resisting arrest. A cop should be allowed lethal force if and only if his life or the life of someone is directly, clearly and immediately threatened. Every other account should be treated like any other case of a citizen murdering an other one. I mean it’s pretty basic really. Its not their fault they were murdered but they increase their odds substantially by fighting with a police officer and/or anyone thats armed. Even if the cop goes to jail for murder, you are still dead. Not discouraging resisting arrest is just dumb. Its not blaming the victim its trying to help them not be a victim. And yes I know that people have been killed when complying. Theres over 300 million people in the US you can find pretty much any situation occuring even if its low odds. That still doesnt mean you should knowingly increase your odds of being killed by fighting cops. Im all for police reform and holding people accountable but it also helps to not put yourself in a bad situation.
How do you address the fact that for a large fraction of the US population, any interaction with the police is 'a bad situation'? This is where putting the onus on the victims falls apart, i.e. a black person can't stop being black to avoid police interactions. I think that this is overblown. I dont doubt racism or racist cops exist but I think for the majority of police encounters this isnt the reason things go bad. Any easy conclusion to make when your not a black man in America, and therefor don't experience what they do. Its a conclusion I could also make if not for the many many interviews and talks of black men about how police interactions for them are, including well off and well educated individuals who are not just making stuff up to sound like life in the 'hood' is tough.
Do you know the odds of being killed by a police officer in the US? Its incredibly low. All this stuff on TV is contributing to a fear of police as a whole. Im not talking specific racist department or cops here but as a whole.
Lets take a look at arrests vs death by police. Most recent data I can find is 2019.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/
https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/ucr.asp?table_in=2
235 black people were killed by police in 2019 and 2,667,010 arrests made
Lets round up and say 1/10,000 of ARRESTS a person is killed.
370 white people killed and 7,014,550 arrests
Lets round down and say 1/20,000 ARRESTS a person is killed.
These are ARRESTS not interactions with police. We know theres a shit ton more of interractions as opposed to arrests so the odds are lower than that. If you assume black people have more interactions with police than white people per capita based off of systemmic racism and the drug war/poverty the odds of a specific encouter leading to being shot and killed goes down even further.
If I told you the odds of something happening were 1/1,000,000 would you give a shit? Probably not. If I doubled your odds to 1/500,000 would care anymore? Not really. Its because percentage increases over infinitely small numbers dont mean much.
This is blown out of proportion. Each case should be evaluated on its own merits. Racist cops and people who acted incorrectly should be held accountable. Derek Chauvin should go to prison. This cop should be held accountable. But lets not stir shit up and pretend like this is bigger than it is and that black people should be fearing being killed from police significantly more than other ethnicities.
I get some people want to use these cases as a means for other police reform. If thats the case at least be honest about it rather than traumatizing a generation to think theyll be murdered by police at every routine traffic stop.
|
Sadist stated clearly that they don't think that people should be executed for resisting arrest. The argument they're pushing is 'it's your fault if you get shot for resisting arrest'.
|
On April 15 2021 23:07 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2021 22:47 Gorsameth wrote:On April 15 2021 22:04 Sadist wrote:On April 15 2021 21:57 EnDeR_ wrote:On April 15 2021 21:52 Sadist wrote:On April 15 2021 21:38 Biff The Understudy wrote:On April 15 2021 20:23 Sadist wrote:On April 15 2021 18:29 BlackJack wrote:On April 15 2021 18:21 Artisreal wrote:On April 15 2021 18:13 BlackJack wrote:
[quote]
So your argument is that people can opt out of healthcare and go home and die so that makes it less bad if a nurse or doctor kills them?
I'll tell you a story of one of my former coworkers that once killed a patient. The gist of the story is that a patient needed to go to the bathroom but their dialysis catheter was hooked up to something. My former coworker disconnected the patient but when he did that he also removed the port to the catheter (essentially a valve that prevents backflow of blood). After the patient was in the bathroom for a while and was nonresponsive to knocks on the door they unlocked the door and found the patient in a pool of his own blood. Dead. Of course the dialysis patient needed dialysis 3 times a week or he would die but he always had the option to go home and touch crystals and die?
My former coworker was a nice guy too, family man, invited me to his fantasy football league. This happened well before I ever worked with him. I'm sure he felt terrible over the whole thing. I think it's safe to assume he didn't lose his license since he was still working in the same hospital at the same job in the same department. No my argument is that they have agency over what happens to them. They are aware of the risks that even highly trained people make mistakes. Which are laid bare plainly. If you ask me, the mistake by your coworker is grave and should be prosecuted according to law. Which is ALL PEOPLE WANT FOR COPS! That they are bound by law. I don't see any contradiction here. Well in the case of Daunte Wright which started this discussion he certainly had agency to comply with the police and go to jail peacefully and there literally would have been zero chance of him being shot. The fact that he attempted to flee, resisted arrest, and initiated a scuffle is the only reason the cop had any reason to draw either her gun or her taser. I would like to think that anyone is aware of the risk that they might be shot anytime they decide to get into a scuffle with police. I agree with this. I dont think anyone would state that resisting arrest should be a death sentence, but at the same time if you play stupid games you win stupid prizes. Its a horrible situation for all that are involved but we all know this is a real possibility that this kind of stuff happens if you fight with someone that is armed (police, civilian, or otherwise). Its like walking in a bad neighborhood at night and getting mugged, is it the persons fault that they got mugged? Absolutely not. But at the same time a lesson learned could be to avoid sketchy areas after dark. Thats for self interest more than victim blaming. So when someone gets murdered by the cops it’s basically their fault because why did he resist arrest? Wow. Talk about victim blaming. You should be punished if you resist arrest. And a cop should be punished if he murders someone, regardless of what they were doing, including resisting arrest. A cop should be allowed lethal force if and only if his life or the life of someone is directly, clearly and immediately threatened. Every other account should be treated like any other case of a citizen murdering an other one. I mean it’s pretty basic really. Its not their fault they were murdered but they increase their odds substantially by fighting with a police officer and/or anyone thats armed. Even if the cop goes to jail for murder, you are still dead. Not discouraging resisting arrest is just dumb. Its not blaming the victim its trying to help them not be a victim. And yes I know that people have been killed when complying. Theres over 300 million people in the US you can find pretty much any situation occuring even if its low odds. That still doesnt mean you should knowingly increase your odds of being killed by fighting cops. Im all for police reform and holding people accountable but it also helps to not put yourself in a bad situation.
How do you address the fact that for a large fraction of the US population, any interaction with the police is 'a bad situation'? This is where putting the onus on the victims falls apart, i.e. a black person can't stop being black to avoid police interactions. I think that this is overblown. I dont doubt racism or racist cops exist but I think for the majority of police encounters this isnt the reason things go bad. Any easy conclusion to make when your not a black man in America, and therefor don't experience what they do. Its a conclusion I could also make if not for the many many interviews and talks of black men about how police interactions for them are, including well off and well educated individuals who are not just making stuff up to sound like life in the 'hood' is tough. Do you know the odds of being killed by a police officer in the US? Its incredibly low. All this stuff on TV is contributing to a fear of police as a whole. Im not talking specific racist department or cops here but as a whole. Lets take a look at arrests vs death by police. Most recent data I can find is 2019. https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/ucr.asp?table_in=2235 black people were killed by police in 2019 and 2,667,010 arrests made Lets round up and say 1/10,000 of ARRESTS a person is killed. 370 white people killed and 7,014,550 arrests Lets round down and say 1/20,000 ARRESTS a person is killed. These are ARRESTS not interactions with police. We know theres a shit ton more of interractions as opposed to arrests so the odds are lower than that. If you assume black people have more interactions with police than white people per capita based off of systemmic racism and the drug war/poverty the odds of a specific encouter leading to being shot and killed goes down even further. If I told you the odds of something happening were 1/1,000,000 would you give a shit? Probably not. If I doubled your odds to 1/500,000 would care anymore? Not really. Its because percentage increases over infinitely small numbers dont mean much. This is blown out of proportion. Each case should be evaluated on its own merits. Racist cops and people who acted incorrectly should be held accountable. Derek Chauvin should go to prison. This cop should be held accountable. But lets not stir shit up and pretend like this is bigger than it is and that black people should be fearing being killed from police significantly more than other ethnicities. I get some people want to use these cases as a means for other police reform. Its kind of a means to and end. If thats the case at least be honest about it rather than traumatizing a generation to think theyll be murdered by police at every routine traffic stop.
Now you're making the 'it's only a few bad apples' argument.
I mean, I doubt we'll convince you that the issue is deeper than that. What I do know is that police officers have never been anything but unfailingly polite to me as a white dude, and that this experience is not universal. Talking to the few black people I know, the picture is _very_ different for them, but that's just anecdotal evidence and I doubt it'll convince you either.
|
Northern Ireland26359 Posts
Sadist if it were a standalone issue and not tangled up in a wider criminal justice web, then sure. There’s a whole smogarsbord of other problematic police policy, of which shootings is merely the most extreme manifestation of. One that really resonates too and punches its way to the top of news bulletins.
As it is, perhaps on a purely numerical sense it is overblown, granted its a rather important symbolic indicator of the health of a society how those with the legal right to dispense state-sanctioned violence behaved.
Honest appraisal of numbers and stats in an attempt to elicit some change runs up against a brick wall of apathy and antipathy when it comes to criminal justice reform, may as well try ramping it up a bit.
|
On April 15 2021 23:20 WombaT wrote:
Sadist if it were a standalone issue and not tangled up in a wider criminal justice web, then sure. There’s a whole smogarsbord of other problematic police policy, of which shootings is merely the most extreme manifestation of. One that really resonates too and punches its way to the top of news bulletins.
As it is, perhaps on a purely numerical sense it is overblown, granted its a rather important symbolic indicator of the health of a society how those with the legal right to dispense state-sanctioned violence behaved.
Honest appraisal of numbers and stats in an attempt to elicit some change runs up against a brick wall of apathy and antipathy when it comes to criminal justice reform, may as well try ramping it up a bit.
This is a fair point and Im sure this is whats going on. I just think its intellectually dishonest to go this route. This is how the right behaves. I would expect better from the left but maybe we've opened Pandora's box and we are too far gone.
|
On April 15 2021 22:55 Simberto wrote:
Even if you resist arrest, you do not deserve to be killed for it. Unless you resist arrest in a way where the only two ways to solve this situation are to kill you or let you kill someone else. But even then, someone in the police fucked up by letting it get to that point. And it would still not be just even in that extreme situation, as cops are not judges nor executioners.
This stuff is not normal nor reasonable. Just because the US is so fucked up that you have a good chance of getting killed when you resist arrest does not mean that this is normal, or how things should be. If you resist arrest, the cops should arrest you with minimum necessary force, and a court of law should decide whether you deserve to be punished for that. The cops should go to great lengths to not kill you. Because that is not their job. if they kill you, they failed at their jobs. Their job in that situation is to arrest you. If you are dead, you are not arrested, and instead of your possible crimes getting justice in a court of law, they stay unresolved because you got killed extrajudiciously by someone who is clearly not competent enough at their job to not kill people.
And, as others have pointed out, we have seen lots of situations where not resisting didn't save the people, either.
people indeed do not deserve to be killed for resisting. if suspects credibly threaten the life of a policeman or woman sure, go for the gun and protect life.
but we are mostly discussing cases where mostly people of color get shot after - let that sink in - a traffic stop. or resist because they are "mentally ill" (which is kinda a margin case and can be complicated as well...). even if they in the course find out there is an arrest outstanding or whatever... be alert and secure the suspect. in the case of the Minnesota lady cop it was apparently followed properly.
except for the fact that she was for unspeakable reasons unable to distinguish a yellow looking tasergun from her actual service weapon with live rounds. she will get prosecuted and get time I am sure, and she already resigned. most likely to lessen the legal blow and because she knows she fucked up. the cam records even show how she herself is surprised how much she fucked up. she blurted it out.
I actually (kinda) feel for her even after that. why? prisons are definitely cop hell. and US prisons are especially notorious.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26359 Posts
On April 15 2021 23:25 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2021 23:20 WombaT wrote:
Sadist if it were a standalone issue and not tangled up in a wider criminal justice web, then sure. There’s a whole smogarsbord of other problematic police policy, of which shootings is merely the most extreme manifestation of. One that really resonates too and punches its way to the top of news bulletins.
As it is, perhaps on a purely numerical sense it is overblown, granted its a rather important symbolic indicator of the health of a society how those with the legal right to dispense state-sanctioned violence behaved.
Honest appraisal of numbers and stats in an attempt to elicit some change runs up against a brick wall of apathy and antipathy when it comes to criminal justice reform, may as well try ramping it up a bit. This is a fair point and Im sure this is whats going on. I just think its intellectually dishonest to go this route. This is how the right behaves. I would expect better from the left but maybe we've opened Pandora's box and we are too far gone.
Opening Pandora’s box here worst case you get widespread civil disobedience and protest, with no reform. The lack of reform would kind of validate the feelings that elicited the protests in the first place. Best case well you get some much-needed reforms.
They resonate further because ‘that could have been me’ isn’t really couched in numbers, just swap a few circumstances and it conceivably could have been.
I feel this personally having been detained by police after my first and so far only serious mental health episode. No violence, no real issues before or since but in that one period where I fell undiagnosed through cracks and it’s American police coming to deal?
Added to that, it’s really not about police killings themselves. It’s the lack of consequences, oversight etc. I think most people can deal with errors, or use of deadly force in genuinely life or death situations. Instead an officer can count themselves unlucky if they even lose their job, never mind more serious censure.
Not just black Americans, but generally poor Americans too, what are their general interactions like with police? What are they doing in their communities?
You don’t have this outpouring of fury if people didn’t have bad experiences themselves on a lower level, if it was a matter of a generally respected police apparatus that occasionally kills people and even more occasionally gets it badly wrong, I don’t see that snowballing much beyond the odd irate Tweet.
|
Why on earth was the police officer even pulling a taser gun is the part that I can't get over. It's already a weapon to the extent that civilians aren't even allowed such things afaik.
Maybe Daunte Wright wouldn't have died had she shot him with a taser instead, but it would have still been completely disproportionate use of force by standards of just about any other first world country police. Wright wasn't violent, wasn't threatening violence as far as I understand. Police officer can't force him out of the car without resorting to weapons? Especially if she had the other police officer right there next to her.
This might be a fundamental cultural difference that will never really change but even use of non-lethal weapons in that situation looks very bizarre from here. In the countries I've lived police may use tasers if someone fights them, or doesn't drop a knife or similar weapon despite multiple commands. They don't shoot people sitting in cars with tasers.
|
Northern Ireland26359 Posts
On April 15 2021 23:39 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2021 23:07 EnDeR_ wrote:
Sadist stated clearly that they don't think that people should be executed for resisting arrest. The argument they're pushing is 'it's your fault if you get shot for resisting arrest'. Is this not the same as, "clearly I don't think that women should be hit by their husbands, however it is their fault if they make them mad enough to hit them?" You really can't logically hold the position that something is not right, but that same something is reasonable if it happens.
It depends entirely what your argument is. Don’t resist arrest because you should defer to the police and behave is totally different from the rationale that you should not resist arrest because some cops are provably incapable of not killing you.
In isolation I don’t think it’s akin to victim blaming, it’s kind of a damning indictment of faith in the cops.
Despite the psychological complexities of domestic violence where it does become a de facto reality, you’re not legally compelled to oblige your partner, you have to with the police in such an interaction.
|
On April 15 2021 23:39 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2021 23:07 EnDeR_ wrote:
Sadist stated clearly that they don't think that people should be executed for resisting arrest. The argument they're pushing is 'it's your fault if you get shot for resisting arrest'. Is this not the same as, "clearly I don't think that women should be hit by their husbands, however it is their fault if they make them mad enough to hit them?" You really can't logically hold the position that something is not right, but that same something is reasonable if it happens.
I don't think it's a case of "it's not right for them to shoot him, but it's also reasonable".
the people saying "he would be alive if he didn't resist arrest" are correct; he almost certainly would be alive if he hadn't tried to flee. In-and-of-itself, it isn't a value statement on the actions of either party in this particular situation since the two statements ("it is wrong to shoot the victim" and "the victim would be alive if he didn't attempt to flee") aren't in any kind of dichotomous relationship.
That said, this statement is completely unnecessary and I honestly just think it is:
1) Cold-hearted.
2) Shows a clear bias towards the police and is a clear attempt to empathize and align with the police as opposed to the victim.
I think comparisons to commenting on women's clothing when they're sexually assaulted are also a bit off-base. I think it's more like if someone's house gets robbed when they leave their house unlocked; technically it's correct that if the victim had just locked their house they would have most likely been fine, but 1) it doesn't reduce the culpability of the offender and 2) that comment ("you should've locked your door") adds nothing to the conversation; it isn't relevant in the context of culpability, it doesn't help any of the parties involved in the actual incident, and its only purpose is to make the speaker feel better about their own allegiances/biases.
To go back to this debate with BlackJack:
The fact of the matter is nurses and doctors kill more people than police through their mistakes. Whether it's many times more or just a few times more is irrelevant to my argument.
This is not a fact at all, as I have pointed out several times and for numerous reasons. You haven't provided a single shred of evidence to actually establish this "fact".
Your argument is that there is a difference between the two because doctors and nurses are trying to help people and the police are trying to subdue/restrain people. In other words the police are trying to so their job which sometimes requires them to restrain/subdue/maim/kill people. So by the sheer circumstances of their job requirements they should be condemned more harshly than if anyone else is harmed accidentally by any other profession?
YES.
Yes, that is 100% what I am saying.
If you have the legal authority to use deadly force on a civilian, you should be held to an incredibly high standard when using that force.
The distinction between a police officer's job and a healthcare provider's job or an engineer's job is also not "arbitrary".
|
Northern Ireland26359 Posts
On April 15 2021 23:45 Oukka wrote:
Why on earth was the police officer even pulling a taser gun is the part that I can't get over. It's already a weapon to the extent that civilians aren't even allowed such things afaik.
Maybe Daunte Wright wouldn't have died had she shot him with a taser instead, but it would have still been completely disproportionate use of force by standards of just about any other first world country police. Wright wasn't violent, wasn't threatening violence as far as I understand. Police officer can't force him out of the car without resorting to weapons? Especially if she had the other police officer right there next to her.
This might be a fundamental cultural difference that will never really change but even use of non-lethal weapons in that situation looks very bizarre from here. In the countries I've lived police may use tasers if someone fights them, or doesn't drop a knife or similar weapon despite multiple commands. They don't shoot people sitting in cars with tasers.
I mean that aside what’s the worst that happens if he runs off?
The same fight or flight response that absolutely will see police making mistakes will be just as present in the civilian population, who generally don’t have experience in such situations nor any kind of training and may do silly things.
You have his car already, he runs off, calms down a bit perhaps and you can peacefully apprehend him no?
Sure if it’s a dangerous violent criminal there’s a public safety aspect in apprehending them at the scene. In other instances it’s not like it’s your only shot to arrest someone either
|
wow you guys. are they actually doing it? Big Balls Biden? stupid stunt?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republicans-slam-assault-on-supreme-court-packing-bill
Republicans recoiled Wednesday night and Thursday morning over a bill some Democrats are proposing to pack the Supreme Court, calling it an "assault" on judicial independence.
But they also predicted that the move would prove unpopular and help Republicans in the midterm elections.
"Democrats are launching a full assault on the independence of the federal judiciary. Republicans will stop them," Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., said in a tweet.
...
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass.; House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.; Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga.; and Rep. Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y.; will announce the bill at 11:30 a.m. Thursday in a press conference on the steps of the Supreme Court.
The legislation would expand the Supreme Court to 13 seats. There are currently nine seats on the court. That number has remained the same since 1869.
Some Democrats have been loudly calling for the expansion of the Supreme Court after former President Donald Trump had three nominees confirmed during his presidency. They decry some of the rulings the court has issued, accusing the justices of being biased toward Republicans.
"Republicans packed the court when Mitch McConnell held Merrick Garland’s seat open nearly a year before an election, then confirmed Amy Coney Barrett days before the next election. Disarming the Court’s radical right-wing majority would correct this injustice," Jones said Thursday.
they better do it right or not at all. just a stupid stunt makes you look weak and gives Rs an easy issue - which they terribly need. since the departure of "Máximo Líder" who lost to "Sleepy Joe" (STOLEN - CHEATED - FRAUD /s) they want to restrict voting and take credit for Biden's bill they did not vote for.
|
That's the right number at least, there should be a justice for every circuit.
|
On April 15 2021 23:55 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2021 23:45 Oukka wrote:
Why on earth was the police officer even pulling a taser gun is the part that I can't get over. It's already a weapon to the extent that civilians aren't even allowed such things afaik.
Maybe Daunte Wright wouldn't have died had she shot him with a taser instead, but it would have still been completely disproportionate use of force by standards of just about any other first world country police. Wright wasn't violent, wasn't threatening violence as far as I understand. Police officer can't force him out of the car without resorting to weapons? Especially if she had the other police officer right there next to her.
This might be a fundamental cultural difference that will never really change but even use of non-lethal weapons in that situation looks very bizarre from here. In the countries I've lived police may use tasers if someone fights them, or doesn't drop a knife or similar weapon despite multiple commands. They don't shoot people sitting in cars with tasers. I mean that aside what’s the worst that happens if he runs off? The same fight or flight response that absolutely will see police making mistakes will be just as present in the civilian population, who generally don’t have experience in such situations nor any kind of training and may do silly things. You have his car already, he runs off, calms down a bit perhaps and you can peacefully apprehend him no? Sure if it’s a dangerous violent criminal there’s a public safety aspect in apprehending them at the scene. In other instances it’s not like it’s your only shot to arrest someone either
Oh the joys of American law. Here's the Wikipedia entry on fleeing from police and the use of deadly force:
Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited in 1985 to non-lethal force in most cases by Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1. The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others."[2]
A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead...however...Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force.
— Justice Byron White, Tennessee v. Garner[3]
Fleeing felons may be followed into places not open to the public without a warrant if the officer is in "hot pursuit."[4]
You can imagine how sweeping "probable cause to believe the suspect is a significant threat" is.
Also I don't think that using a taser is considered deadly force in most American legal jurisdictions.
|
On April 15 2021 23:45 Oukka wrote:
Why on earth was the police officer even pulling a taser gun is the part that I can't get over. It's already a weapon to the extent that civilians aren't even allowed such things afaik.
Maybe Daunte Wright wouldn't have died had she shot him with a taser instead, but it would have still been completely disproportionate use of force by standards of just about any other first world country police. Wright wasn't violent, wasn't threatening violence as far as I understand. Police officer can't force him out of the car without resorting to weapons? Especially if she had the other police officer right there next to her.
This might be a fundamental cultural difference that will never really change but even use of non-lethal weapons in that situation looks very bizarre from here. In the countries I've lived police may use tasers if someone fights them, or doesn't drop a knife or similar weapon despite multiple commands. They don't shoot people sitting in cars with tasers.
yes. crime we have in wealthy (EU countries) and relatively homogenous societies with a functioning social safety net is something completely different from the crime that happens in many states in the US.
add to that the gun fetish - the gaping social divide and the racial divide... and a couple other factors. and yeah, would be a wonder if things were not going awry to be honest.
|
On April 15 2021 23:45 Oukka wrote:
Why on earth was the police officer even pulling a taser gun is the part that I can't get over. It's already a weapon to the extent that civilians aren't even allowed such things afaik.
Maybe Daunte Wright wouldn't have died had she shot him with a taser instead, but it would have still been completely disproportionate use of force by standards of just about any other first world country police. Wright wasn't violent, wasn't threatening violence as far as I understand. Police officer can't force him out of the car without resorting to weapons? Especially if she had the other police officer right there next to her.
This might be a fundamental cultural difference that will never really change but even use of non-lethal weapons in that situation looks very bizarre from here. In the countries I've lived police may use tasers if someone fights them, or doesn't drop a knife or similar weapon despite multiple commands. They don't shoot people sitting in cars with tasers.
This.
One of the biggest issues in the US is that cops are simply not trained to de-escalate situations, rather, they're primed to pull out their guns. A while back I saw a video of a police training event from the early 00's where the instructor was talking about police officers being the hunters and the suspects being the prey. I tried to link it here, but I can't find it again, sorry.
I'm also fairly certain John Oliver did a bit on this, on a segment about 'Police Warrior Training'. I'm pretty sure it's this link www.youtube.com but can't open it at work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
