Rayshard Brooks Killed By Police In Atlanta. Free TVs For Everyone..

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, Boges said:

You just said these people were "released" indicating it's some funding issue, not a rights issue. 

 

No, it was a rights issue.   The courts ruled that the mentally ill cannot be institutionalized until after they are proven to be a threat to society or themselves.

So society just dumped them on the streets for the cops to worry about.

[Boges]

Just now, Argus said:

I asked if you had a replacement for police taking care of burglaries, robberies, shoplifting, vandalism, etc.

Polce actually don't do a great job at stopping any of those things. They just come in after the fact, write a police report and usually insurance has to take care of everything. Do police really catch petty thieves at any great rate? 

 

Quote

Photo radar doesn't do much good if the car is stolen. Do you have a replacement for who will deal with stolen cars?

Well, if you wanted, every car could have a GPS, I'm actually pretty sure they all do now anyway. 

[Infidel Dog]

Here's some interesting stats from 2016. I'm going to assume the sort of incidents where an officer is killed are the sort that inspire an officer to shoot the perp.

Quote

Circumstances: At the time the 66 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed:

• 17 were ambushed (entrapment/premeditation);
• 13 were answering disturbance calls (seven were domestic disturbance calls);
• nine were investigating suspicious persons/circumstances;
• six were engaged in tactical situations;
• five were performing investigative activities (such as surveillances, searches, or interviews);
• four were conducting traffic pursuits/stops;
• three were investigating drug-related matters;
• three were victims of unprovoked attacks;
• one was answering a burglary in progress call or pursuing a burglary suspect(s);
• one was answering a robbery in progress call or pursuing a robbery suspect(s); and
• four were attempting other arrests.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2016-statistics-for-law-enforcement-officers-killed-and-assaulted-in-the-line-of-duty

Social workers could stop those crimes the police were dealing with,, could they? How? Arm them maybe?

Edited June 15, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[Shady]

4 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

He was still in control of a motor vehicle while drunk....a crime.

He’s become so deranged that he’s now defending drunk driving, resisting arrest and using an officer’s weapon against them.  I think he should join the police force and show us all how it’s done.  This is another example of the domestic chicken hawk.  

[Shady]

Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

No, it was a rights issue.   The courts ruled that the mentally ill cannot be institutionalized until after they are proven to be a threat to society or themselves.

So society just dumped them on the streets for the cops to worry about.

He’s completely ignorant of the issue regarding the mentally ill.  But posts like he’s an expert.

[Boges]

1 minute ago, Infidel Dog said:

Here's some interesting stats from 2016. I'm going to assume the sort of incidents where an officer is killed are the sort that inspire an officer to shoot at the perp.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2016-statistics-for-law-enforcement-officers-killed-and-assaulted-in-the-line-of-duty

Social workers could stop those crimes, could they? How? Arm them maybe?

The largest line-item there were police being specifically targeted. Meaning a Social Worker probably wouldn't be. 

[Argus]

Just now, Boges said:

Polce actually don't do a great job at stopping any of those things. They just come in after the fact, write a police report and usually insurance has to take care of everything. Do police really catch petty thieves at any great rate? 

Not in Canada, because they're underfunded and don't have time. Do you think life and civility would improve if we had no police doing anything and people were free to steal anything they felt like stealing, or just walk down the street getting their giggles by smashing car windows and headlights with a hammer?

Just now, Boges said:

Well, if you wanted, every car could have a GPS, I'm actually pretty sure they all do now anyway. 

And what good does that do without police? Are you advising people to go and get their car back themselves? Do we get to bring a gun when we do so?

[Boges]

Just now, Shady said:

He’s completely ignorant of the issue regarding the mentally ill.  But posts like he’s an expert.

Are you? 

Complain police aren't equipped to handle the mentally ill and also complain that there isn't funding to handle the mentally ill. 

Something has to give. 

[Boges]

Just now, Argus said:

Not in Canada, because they're underfunded and don't have time. Do you think life and civility would improve if we had no police doing anything and people were free to steal anything they felt like stealing, or just walk down the street getting their giggles by smashing car windows and headlights with a hammer?

Even if they did. What would they do? If someone wants to stop theft they'd have to invest in a security system. 

 

Quote

And what good does that do without police? Are you advising people to go and get their car back themselves? Do we get to bring a gun when we do so?

Do you contend that I'm saying to abolish police? I'm saying there are many things cops currently do that they don't need to be doing.

[Infidel Dog]

1 minute ago, Boges said:

The largest line-item there were police being specifically targeted. Meaning a Social Worker probably wouldn't be. 

Are you sure? Because wouldn't the social worker be the face the criminal sees as being in his way in your brave new world? Or is crime supposed to stop because a social worker is getting more money sitting in his office. Or if we just ignore crime does that mean it's gone?

[Boges]

1 minute ago, Infidel Dog said:

Are you sure? Because wouldn't the social worker be the face the criminal sees as being in his way in your brave new world? Or is crime supposed to stop because a social worker is getting more money sitting in his office. Or if we just ignore crime does that mean it's gone?

You would have to analyze why crime happens first. 

It's not just evil people being evil. A lot of it can be linked to societal problems that can be fixed by other things than cops banging heads. 

[Infidel Dog]

BTW how did the mentally ill get into this?

Rayshard did behave irrationally but I don't understand how a social worker would have stopped him from behaving the way he did. Would the social worker have gone to the McDonalds drive-thru late at night to wake him up, passed out in his car? Explain it to me.

[Boges]

1 minute ago, Infidel Dog said:

BTW how did the mentally ill get into this?

Rayshard did behave irrationally but I don't understand how a social worker would have stopped him from behaving the way he did. Would the social worker have gone to the McDonalds drive-thru late at night to wake him up, passed out in his car? Explain it to me.

Just a by-product of the Defund the Police debate. 

But I do think that someone trained better wouldn't have resorted to a physical confrontation as soon as this cop did. 

Edited June 15, 2020 by Boges

[Infidel Dog]

So what specifically are you recommending then? Social workers doing police work or better trained police?

Decriminalizing certain crimes maybe? Legalizing which crime would have saved Rayshard Brooks. 

Edited June 15, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[Boges]

3 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

So what specifically are recommending then? Social workers doing police work or better trained police?

Defund the Police is a really bad terminology, but it's the one Lefties use. Bad Marketing I concede. 

https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/502648-what-defund-the-police-actually-means

It's more redefining the police. 

As I've said multiple times, it appears a community, Camden, NJ has done this with great success. 

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/06/12/camden-policing-reforms-313750

[Infidel Dog]

Hang on...I have to read your articles. 

Really interested in learning how "redefining the police" would have save Rayshard Brooks.

[Boges]

Just now, Infidel Dog said:

Hang on...I have to read your articles. 

Really interested in learning how "redefining the police" would have save Rayshard Brooks.

If you're accusing me of thread drift, I'll concede a bit of that. 

This is the thread where this whole BLM issue has kind of migrated to. 

My deepest apologies if you're offended. 

I will say that better trained cops wouldn't have allowed this to get escalated as quickly as it did. 

And the shooter did get fired and will likely get charged. 

[Infidel Dog]

Still reading but I'll drift a bit myself to ask you. What is it about the progressive mindset that they assume if somebody questions them they're offended. I'm not offended. If you can make sense of the nonsensical I'm intrigued. And if you can actually do it I'll give you a big thumbs up and an enthusiastic "good one."

Still reading...

If you want a spoiler you're not doing too well so far.

Edited June 15, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[WestCanMan]

4 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Here's some interesting stats from 2016. I'm going to assume the sort of incidents where an officer is killed are the sort that inspire an officer to shoot the perp.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2016-statistics-for-law-enforcement-officers-killed-and-assaulted-in-the-line-of-duty

Social workers could stop those crimes the police were dealing with,, could they? How? Arm them maybe?

To be honest, some [maybe all] of those 17 'ambushed' cops were killed as part of the Obama-era riots. Social workers would have been completely safe walking into 90% of those ambushes.

Your points stands 100% though, sending social workers into homes where there is a violent disturbance going on is just impossible. Even EMTs don't go into those places until they're cleared by police, and the level of urgency to get an EMT onto the scene is orders of magnitude higher than it is to get a social worker in. By that time, you don't need one anymore. 

Police will always be the "shock troops" going into possible violent scenarios. They have guns, badges, tasers, they pass fitness tests, they pass self-defence courses, they take de-escalation training, and even they still get hurt sometimes.

The cost of insurance to get non-trained people to go into likely self-defence situations would be ludicrous. The cost of injury claims would be through the roof. It's an impossibility in the era of lawsuits and insurance. 

[Boges]

1 minute ago, Infidel Dog said:

Still reading but I'll drift a bit myself to ask you. What is it about the progressive mindset that they assume if somebody questions them they're offended. I'm not offended. If you can make sense of the nonsensical I'm intrigued. And if you can actually do it I'll give you a big thumbs up and say "good one."

Still reading...

If you want a spoiler you're not doing too well so far.

Again those articles are just cites to the issues being raised. 

I was being a bit tongue and cheek about offence. 

All these issues are intertwined IMHO.

[Infidel Dog]

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

To be honest, some [maybe all] of those 17 'ambushed' cops were killed as part of the Obama-era riots. Social workers would have been completely safe walking into 90% of those ambushes.

You could be right. The one I remember is that guy who shot the 5 cops at the Black Lives Matter rally. I heard that poor psycho was pushed over the ledge of reason by propaganda brain-training he'd gotten watching videos of The Young Turks. Not sure if social workers could have helped him with that one. For starters they would have had to disavow the progressive left.

[WestCanMan]

15 minutes ago, Boges said:

And the shooter did get fired and will likely get charged. 

To say that the cops would be charged criminally is to say that they have to allow something like a taser to shock their partner in the face or eyes in the first place, without shooting. 

You have to take into account that at the moment the officer decided to shoot, he was still defending his partner. He might have decided to shoot when the taser was aimed, but even if it was momentarily afterwards, the taser's hooks could have been in his partners face or eyes. The 50,000 volt jolt could still be coming.

There's no doubt that when he shot, he could have been saving his partner from very serious injuries. 

 

Anyone who is comfortable saying that this was a crime should be willing to have a taser shot at their face from 15 feet away, knowing that if it goes in, they get the 50,000 volt blast. It won't likely kill them, right? It's not so dangerous that you should be allowed to defend yourself or your partner, right? 

Are you willing to take 50,000 volts to the face, so that you can be the one to lay criminal charges? 

[Boges]

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

To say that the cops would be charged criminally is to say that they have to allow something like a taser to shock their partner in the face or eyes in the first place, without shooting. 

You have to take into account that at the moment the officer decided to shoot, he was still defending his partner. He might have decided to shoot when the taser was aimed, but even if it was momentarily afterwards, the taser's hooks could have been in his partners face or eyes. The 50,000 volt jolt could still be coming.

There's no doubt that when he shot, he could have been saving his partner from very serious injuries. 

Anyone who is comfortable saying that this was a crime should be willing to have a taser shot at their face from 15 feet away, knowing that if it goes in, they get the 50,000 volt blast. It won't likely kill them, right? It's not so dangerous that you should be allowed to defend yourself or your partner, right? 

Are you willing to take 50,000 volts to the face, so that you can be the one to lay criminal charges? 

Tazers don't have the range of a gun, you have to also assume that close pursuit was in the best interest of all involved. 

He was running away, they had his car. What was he going to do? Start murdering random people with a 2-charge tazer?  

[WestCanMan]

15 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

You could be right. The one I remember is that guy who shot the 5 cops at the Black Lives Matter rally. I heard that poor psycho was pushed over the ledge of reason by propaganda brain-training he'd gotten watching videos of The Young Turks. Not sure if social workers could have helped him with that one. For starters they would have had to disavow the progressive left.

The young turks and that Cenk Uyger or whatever his name is, is a complete joke.

If you look that name up you'll see that 'The Young Turks' was the name of a group that was largely responsible for the Armenian Genocide. https://www.armenian-genocide.org/young_turks.html I didn't even read this, it's just the first google result. 

 

Anyhow, who the fuck would name their show after a group that committed genocide? [Just them, and the neo-Nazis. That's about it.] This is the era where statues are coming down of people who committed far less serious crimes against humanity than outright bigot-fuelled genocide, and a leftist news show picks that name?

No real shocker, alt-leftists, Antifa, BLM and the neo-Nazis are all birds of a feather. 

I'm getting into thread drift territory now, my bad. 

[WestCanMan]

1 minute ago, Boges said:

Tazers don't have the range of a gun, you have to also assume that close pursuit was in the best interest of all involved. 

He was running away, they had his car. What was he going to do? Start murdering random people with a 2-charge tazer?  

The cops didn't shoot him while he was running. They shot him while he was tazing. That's a fact, clearly recorded on video that we've all seen.

Rayshard was potentially about to jolt a cop in the face with a 50,000-volt taser. The taser had enough range to get him there. That's why Rayshard is dead.

The shooting had nothing to do with whether or not they would have eventually caught him. You're out on a limb known as 'lying'.