Yeah you said that the whole time you were making personal attacks on me after you put me on your ignore list. Funny thing about cowards, they never do own up to their cowardly acts.
And I meant cowardly in a kind loving way "brother". :thumbs:
BTW I like the new you much better. :smilewinkgrin:
9 cops detain 1 US teen for refusing to use sidewalk (VIDEO)
Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by poncho, Sep 18, 2015.
Page 2 of 3
-
The strange part is after they put us on their ignore list they still think we should have to hear what they have to say in the threads we start.
If you want to ignore me fine. No problem. But be consistent about it. Ignore the threads I start to. -
-
Deep down he knows what he did was wrong. :smilewinkgrin:
I am serious about liking the new ITL better than the old one. He's mellowed out alot and I respect him for his fair and balanced way of looking at all sides of an issue these days. He seems more interested in the evidence than the propaganda now.
Now if only I could convince him that the bible is right about the borrower being servant the lender . . . -
So where exactly is this revenue going to come from?
I'll tell you...from criminals who would prosper greatly without the fear of Law Enforcement.
Your plan is simply not rational. If you think the Police are bad, try having the mafia or drug cartels in charge.
The sad thing about the Police Force is it has humans in it. As long as there are humans, at least, more than one, involved in anything...there is going to be corruption.
but the simple math would see that as a whole we are better off with having a police force we can count on to handle Law and Justice. Just because there are a few bad apples in the bunch doesn't mean we throw them all out, we just grind the bad ones up and make applesauce out of them.
Right?
And I'll throw this in for free: personally I see it as a good thing for corrupt police officers to be found out. Anyone that abuses power should be punished, and while you might debate as to whether the punishment is severe or not (I might too in certain cases), it makes little difference what kind of criminal ends up in jail, just as long as they end up there.
God bless. -
if the good cops are gonna keep letting the bad cops break the law, then get rid of all of them and find some folks who will actually enforce the laws even against folks in uniform.
-
-
They control and regulate the market and it's a big market. The US government could be in charge of the market and regulate it but that would take legalizing drugs to gain control of the market in order to regulate it.
Which is a doubtful outcome in the near future to say the least. The government including the police depends on the continuance of the illegal drug trade to increase it's size, funding and control over the lives of every citizen.
The keep it illegal folks and the government prefer having the drug cartels in charge of this big market. Their rational? "Drugs are bad".
BTW, a lot of the keep it illegal folks are the same ones who claim they are against "big government" even though keeping drugs illegal which means leaving the drug cartels in charge of the market and the regulation there of that does nothing to curb the flow of drugs onto our streets and actually increases the size, scope, corruption of the police and other govt "officials" and the intrusiveness of the big government they claim to be against.
How is this plan (leaving the drug cartels in charge of the market) rational? -
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/08/watch-14-police-officers-take-down-a-one-legged-homeless-black-man-armed-with-crutches-in-san-francisco/
Here's another group of officers being careful not to harm a "combatant" individual while detaining him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ariXIEUJkyI
Not to worry no officers were harmed during this dangerous life threatening encounter.
Same here . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWQ5lu8jSMc -
And the only other point I would make is I did not suggest a plan for them to be in charge, but presented that as a corollary to the police being removed through "bankrupting the town."
While you may consider the government to allow them to be in charge, even if that were true then we see that that very same Law Enforcement is at the very least keeping them in check according to their efforts in this imagined conspiracy.
God bless. -
They must have had quite a bit of practice.
;)
God bless. -
-
How can you say the drug cartels aren't in charge of the market with a straight face? If the government were in charge of the market the drugs themselves would be taxed and regulated by the government. They aren't.
Which can only mean the government isn't in charge of the market. And if the government isn't in charge of the market, who is?
If the police are found guilty of abusing their authority and causing damage to another individual or property the tax payers foot the bills.
If there's any question of what I'm saying here let me be clear, the offending officer should be held personally responsible for his wrong doing not the tax payers.
-
It's all in the nature, man. All in the nature.
And I would remind you...you should understand that.
God bless. -
Meet the “Expert” Who Teaches Cops to Shoot First and Then Gets Paid to Get them Off After
Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/meet-expert-teaches-cops-shoot-paid/#veXAkyQhHi0lPm8h.99 -
Let's back up:
Darrell C said: ↑Your plan is simply not rational. If you think the Police are bad, try having the mafia or drug cartels in charge.Click to expand...
You completely avoid that point and skip to...
poncho said: ↑The drug cartels are in charge Darrell.
They control and regulate the market and it's a big market. The US government could be in charge of the market and regulate it but that would take legalizing drugs to gain control of the market in order to regulate it.Click to expand...
Especially from someone who says they are a Christian. You can complain about how the Government is doing when they are trying to deal with criminal activity and then suggest...they change sides?
So you would rather have the Government Officials involved in Law Enforcement now...engage in what only criminals engage in?
Gotta shake my head on that one, amigo.
poncho said: ↑I thought you might be a different sort than that Darrell.Click to expand...
We have, after all, engaged in discussion more than once, though it has been a little while.
poncho said: ↑How can you say the drug cartels aren't in charge of the market with a straight face?Click to expand...
Though I guess I am glad you brought it up.
poncho said: ↑If the government were in charge of the market the drugs themselves would be taxed and regulated by the government. They aren't.Click to expand...
poncho said: ↑Which is a doubtful outcome in the near future to say the least. The government including the police depends on the continuance of the illegal drug trade to increase it's size, funding and control over the lives of every citizen.Click to expand...
At least...that's how it comes across. And we see that it comes down to a matter of that replacing you, the taxpayer...as the one footing the bill for corrupt police officers.
Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
poncho said: ↑Which can only mean the government isn't in charge of the market. And if the government isn't in charge of the market, who is?Click to expand...
...who is in charge.
So my statement...
Go live in other countries where that might be said with a straight face.Click to expand...
...is not telling you to go live in another country (if you're not happy with things here), but, go live in another country where drug cartels are in power and say that with a straight face.
Say that conditions there are better than here.
But the truth is, people are not migrating to South America to escape police corruption here, are they?
poncho said: ↑Quote:
And the only other point I would make is I did not suggest a plan for them to be in charge, but presented that as a corollary to the police being removed through "bankrupting the town."Click to expand...Click to expand...
Wait, are you suggesting that corrupt police officers foot their own bill?
Great idea. Let's do that with all of them.
poncho said: ↑If the police are found guilty of abusing their authority and causing damage to another individual or property the tax payers foot the bills.Click to expand...
For example, we might differ as to what we consider abuse in any given situation. The best person to answer whether a police officer has abused his power and stepped out of line would be of course another Law Enforcement Official, not the average citizen who has not been the one to stand in harms way, who might not understand an over zealous reaction to a potentially dangerous situation.
poncho said: ↑If there's any question of what I'm saying here let me be clear, the offending officer should be held personally responsible for his wrong doing not the tax payers.Click to expand...
Just how exactly is the officer going to do that...if he is in jail?
poncho said: ↑Quote:
While you may consider the government to allow them to be in charge, even if that were true then we see that that very same Law Enforcement is at the very least keeping them in check according to their efforts in this imagined conspiracy.Click to expand...Click to expand...
As I said, go to a country where we see true failure and corruption on the part of Governments.
I don't see it as failed at all, and it would be better if we didn't have people who condemn what the Government has achieved yet suggesting that the Government go into the business.
poncho said: ↑Which doesn't support your assumptions at all no matter how many pejoratives you employ to defend them.Click to expand...
poncho said: ↑Quote:
God bless.
Same to you.Click to expand...
I'll assume that was said in a nice way.
;)
God bless. -
poncho said: ↑If that's what you believe then you should . . .
Meet the “Expert” Who Teaches Cops to Shoot First and Then Gets Paid to Get them Off After
Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/meet-expert-teaches-cops-shoot-paid/#veXAkyQhHi0lPm8h.99Click to expand...
Doesn't matter if the perp was reaching for a comb, if he does not "freeze" when told to do so by an authorized agent of the People...he gets what he deserves.
That is not to say that cops can shoot whoever and whenever they want, but that when it comes to the Police Officer's safety...that is the highest priority.
We have them there for a reason, and only a dimwit doesn't understand that, and only an anti-authoritarian who hasn't grown up would challenge that authority.
Cop tells me freeze, I'm going to freeze, lol. Being offended that they might mistake me as dangerous or a criminal is not a reason to roll the dice that the cop holding the gun is experienced, not racist, not a dimwit himself, or incapable of proper and legal procedure.
Rather simple concept, authority is, lol.
God bless. -
poncho said: ↑Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
So police officers are trained to violate people's rights?
It's all in the nature, man. All in the nature.
And I would remind you...you should understand that.
God bless.Click to expand...Click to expand...
;)
God bless. -
Zaac said: ↑Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
Maybe if we teach our kids a little respect for their elders and authority we would not have to worry about police involvement so much.Click to expand...Click to expand...
Basically, the premise is "My tax money goes to paying for their salary, hence...they work for me."
Now that is simply not true. If they worked for you then you could walk up to one and say, "Officer Smith, I want you to go over to my neighbor's and arrest him for playing his music so loud."
Now a parallel to my own business: it is true that my customers pay me to work on or install heating and air conditioning in their house, they are "footing the bill."
Does that mean I work for them?
Nope...I am doing work for them. Big difference. If I worked for them, then I would expect them to provide medical insurance, paid holidays, paid vacations, et cetera.
Another analogy might be a burger shop employee. Do they work for you? You're footing the bill, right?
Police Officers do indeed work for the People, my friend, but not as employees, but in the sense that what they do is for the benefit of the People. And whether you want to admit it or not, you are better off because of their efforts than you would be if they were not around.
Zaac said: ↑Quote:
So where exactly is this revenue going to come from?Click to expand...Click to expand...
Zaac said: ↑It's fine with me if when they bankrupt some of these municipalities, that they just don't come back. Some of them need to be gone.Click to expand...
So you have gone from utter condemnation of the police force based on the actions of a minority (though you may suppose it is the majority, which the facts do not indicate seeing crime is stopped on a daily basis in this country)...
...to condemning the People as well.
Now wait a minute...doesn't that justify the actions of the Police you are railing against? lol
Just think about that.
Zaac said: ↑Quote:
I'll tell you...from criminals who would prosper greatly without the fear of Law Enforcement.Click to expand...Click to expand...
Zaac said: ↑Your plan is simply not rational. If you think the Police are bad, try having the mafia or drug cartels in charge.Click to expand...Click to expand...
Zaac said: ↑How about if someone doesn't like how you act, and feels you should be bankrupted?Click to expand...Click to expand...
No, let's keep it straight. Is it okay for someone to take you to the cleaners and throw you in jail for similar offence? It's not just the lawsuit, but the sentiment that they are altogether corrupt and should be removed you are presenting.
And why would we listen to your defense if you felt you were simply doing your duty? Should that matter? And would we want the opinion of your peers to better gauge whether or not you felt justified in your actions?
Zaac said: ↑The sad thing about the Police Force is it has humans in it. As long as there are humans, at least, more than one, involved in anything...there is going to be corruption.Click to expand...Click to expand...
That is just ludicrous.
Zaac said: ↑Somebodies somewhere have trained them to act like this.Click to expand...
lol...oh really?
I think I can tell you why certain cops might react aggressively...in remembrance of those Police Officers who have been slain.
I can't blame an Officer for wanting to go home to his family every night.
Zaac said: ↑but the simple math would see that as a whole we are better off with having a police force we can count on to handle Law and Justice. Just because there are a few bad apples in the bunch doesn't mean we throw them all out, we just grind the bad ones up and make applesauce out of them.
Right?Click to expand...Click to expand...
And that is simply not carried out by the evidence, which, if you would like to view it...go visit a prison or jail.
Do you believe they are all innocent of the charges they have been convicted of?
Zaac said: ↑if the good cops are gonna keep letting the bad cops break the law, then get rid of all of them and find some folks who will actually enforce the laws even against folks in uniform.Click to expand...
Your view is not supported by some very simple realities concerning crime in our country, and that you would get rid of Law Enforcement because of a very small ratio of questionable arrests and shootings suggests what you yourself have said, you would remove one system with no clue as to what would fill the vacuum would look like.
Zaac said: ↑Quote:
And I'll throw this in for free: personally I see it as a good thing for corrupt police officers to be found out. Anyone that abuses power should be punished, and while you might debate as to whether the punishment is severe or not (I might too in certain cases), it makes little difference what kind of criminal ends up in jail, just as long as they end up there.Click to expand...Click to expand...
Me, I think someone carrying a device that looks like a bomb is just asking for trouble. The argument "Kids make volcanos every year" doesn't fly because those kids were told to do those projects, or at least, that was an option given.
At no time, especially in this day and age, is there any justification for someone doing something like that.
Two days ago someone found a pipe with tape on it with the word written "kaboom" on it, and the school was closed.
Were they violating someone's right to freedom of expression?
And again, if a cop tells someone to do something...they better do it. Why? Because we have to give Police that authority in order for them to effectively deal with crime. Because we have stripped Teachers of authority...we are reaping the result of a lack of respect for people in positions of authority. If I had a kid showing disrespect to those in authority over them...they would be the ones in trouble, not the people in authority.
Zaac said: ↑If the good cops start taking action against these bad cops,Click to expand...
Zaac said: ↑I guarantee that the stuff that we're seeing will get fixed because departments would either do a complete overhaul or have an internal war on their hands.Click to expand...
How about if you do this: take one of the incidents that have a questionable collar or shooting, and research the history of the Precinct. Do you think you would find that in many of these...Police Officers had been killed in the line of duty?
I live in a more rural county and just a month or so ago a police officer shot a man to death. The guy had a gun, and he ended up dead. That kind of thing happens. Everywhere.
God bless. -
Darrell C said: ↑No, Poncho, you have changed what I was speaking about altogether.
Let's back up:
The point is, if like our friend Zaac's reasoning were carried out, there would be no restraint on criminal activity.
You completely avoid that point and skip to...Click to expand...
Now the suggestion that the U.S. Government regulate "the market" is as preposterous as "bankrupting Stockton," or any other city.Click to expand...
I understand the urge to use them as a way of making the user appear to be endowed with unquestionable credibility but I fail to see how they benefit a discussion other than that.
Just for a change of pace could we let the facts and evidence decide the level of credibility in this discussion?
Especially from someone who says they are a Christian.Click to expand...
You can complain about how the Government is doing when they are trying to deal with criminal activity and then suggest...they change sides?Click to expand...
So you would rather have the Government Officials involved in Law Enforcement now...engage in what only criminals engage in?
Gotta shake my head on that one, amigo.Click to expand...
You should be familiar with me well enough by now, Poncho.
We have, after all, engaged in discussion more than once, though it has been a little while.Click to expand...
I wouldn't, lol, as it is irrelevant to the point I made.Click to expand...
Though I guess I am glad you brought it up.Click to expand...
You suggest the Government and Police are propagating the drug trade for self serving purposes, then imply an acceptance of the Government engaging in what they currently seek to stamp out.
At least...that's how it comes across. And we see that it comes down to a matter of that replacing you, the taxpayer...as the one footing the bill for corrupt police officers.
Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?Click to expand...
The point was that the Police are in charge of deterring crime. The scenario plays out that Zaac Bankrupts Stockton, there is no more police force, and then comes the relevance of the question of...
...who is in charge.
So my statement......is not telling you to go live in another country (if you're not happy with things here), but, go live in another country where drug cartels are in power and say that with a straight face.
Say that conditions there are better than here.
But the truth is, people are not migrating to South America to escape police corruption here, are they?
So now we return to my point. lolClick to expand...
Wait, are you suggesting that corrupt police officers foot their own bill?
Great idea. Let's do that with all of them.Click to expand...
I would agree those who abuse authority should be held to a higher standard, but at the same time we have a bit of a difference in determining if one did that, as opposed to cases where it is clear the person is guilty of crime.
For example, we might differ as to what we consider abuse in any given situation. The best person to answer whether a police officer has abused his power and stepped out of line would be of course another Law Enforcement Official, not the average citizen who has not been the one to stand in harms way, who might not understand an over zealous reaction to a potentially dangerous situation.Click to expand...
We're looking for solutions not more of the same thing that brought us to this point . . . at least I am.
And if I suggest that if you were found to be guilty of a crime that you should foot the bill...are you okay with that?Click to expand...
Just how exactly is the officer going to do that...if he is in jail?Click to expand...
Failed?Click to expand...
As I said, go to a country where we see true failure and corruption on the part of Governments.Click to expand...
Give the overworked strawmen a rest break. Just show me the evidence that the 40+ year old policy of drug prohibition has been successful if you believe it has been.
I don't see it as failed at all, and it would be better if we didn't have people who condemn what the Government has achieved yet suggesting that the Government go into the business.Click to expand...
By the same rational we'd have been better off if the signatories of the Declaration of Independence had just submitted to the English Crown. Whiners and complainers one and all.
No assumptions or pejoratives on my part. Please quote them. I see only a manipulation of what I said to provide a pulpit to preach your views, lol.Click to expand...
"Same to you..."
I'll assume that was said in a nice way.
;)Click to expand...
God bless.Click to expand...
Page 2 of 3