Police Brutality & Executions

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Nope. You ignored the officer lying and focused solely on the woman. This is not the first time an issue like this comes up and you use deflection to move the goalposts. The reason the woman is now free is the police officer lied but let's focus on the woman to re-convict her in the court of public opinion, making her bad again and thus the lying officer is somehow justified.

She's not convicted of what she is charged but rather convicted for what she wasn't. In that narrative, none of us are say from guilt as a result of false charges.

Had you said, "this is not to justify the officer lying but the woman had skeletons too" makes your point while not protecting lying.

Again, it's what you didn't say.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
Nope. You ignored the officer lying and focused solely on the woman. This is not the first time an issue like this comes up and you use deflection to move the goalposts. The reason the woman is now free is the police officer lied but let's focus on the woman to re-convict her in the court of public opinion, making her bad again and thus the lying officer is somehow justified.

She's not convicted of what she is charged but rather convicted for what she wasn't. In that narrative, none of us are say from guilt as a result of false charges.

Had you said, "this is not to justify the officer lying but the woman had skeletons too" makes your point while not protecting lying.

Again, it's what you didn't say.

Nope. I did point out the cop lied but that wasn't what my post was about. Despite your attempts to make it so.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
You only noted the cops testimony was thrown out which is just the restating of a known fact. I don't find that as a condemnation of the officer lying. But if after the fact is works that way for you, then so be it.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
You only noted the cops testimony was thrown out which is just the restating of a known fact. I don't find that as a condemnation of the officer lying. But if after the fact is works that way for you, then so be it.

So I restated a known fact. Do you object to facts? I also notice you avoided mentioning how you stated how innocent the woman was when in reality it was more a situation of not guilty. There is a difference. That was what my post was about despite your attempts to make it about something else.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
So I restated a known fact. Do you object to facts? I also notice you avoided mentioning how you stated how innocent the woman was when in reality it was more a situation of not guilty. There is a difference. That was what my post was about despite your attempts to make it about something else.

That's correct, I did not offer any commentary on the woman. The woman was found innocent of the charges as per the article and as I pointed out. Your charges seems more about the court of public opinion making the woman look bad in order to make the officer look justified in some manner. Well she's bad anyway so the officer did get her off the street so no harm, no foul.

Also fact is, I never read the link you posted so it may be pure BS however as to her possible skeletons, I did offer your point "may well be true" as to her character. So a bad person is an excuse for me to lie in order to get the bad person? The bad person lied so I can lie back? This form of moral belief some of you people hold is rather, shall we say, Satanic! ;)

However my focus was on the police officer who is upholding the law yet he choose to break it to achieve an end. If justice is achieved via injustice, how long before justice is gone?

We seem to treat police officers as other worldly when it comes to ethics and thus the reverse is that all perps are liars and cheats. The officer's word is always true and the perps is always lie. The ole good verses evil thingy. I'm arguing there are contradictions to that thinking and many officers will agree as well. And some officers will go as far to say that the system promotes and rewards it and I tend to agree with that. Many of them don't like it either but our refusal to ignore it makes it worse and the few who do dare to speak out end up getting crushed which keeps the "thin blue line" in place.

A false conviction creates 2 injustices. The first is that an innocent person is wrongly convicted and the second is that the guilty is still at large.

I always love the great sheepdog story when it comes to folks like policeman and soldiers and no doubt many of them are noble in heart with intentions. The sheepdog does protect us from the ravaging wolves so that we live a peaceful life but the other side of the question so often never gets asked.

So who is the farmer that owns the sheepdog?
and
At the end of the day, what does the farmer do with and too the sheep?
and
How does that differ in the end from what the wolf wants to do as it relates to the sheep's POV?
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
GcZ5dTW.jpg
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
No but if you are innocent why run?


Though Americans commonly believe law enforcement’s role in society is to protect them and ensure peace and stability within the community, the sad reality is that police departments are often more focused on enforcing laws, making arrests and issuing citations. As a result of this as well as an increase in militarized policing techniques, Americans are eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist, estimates a Washington’s Blog report based on official statistical data.

Though the U.S. government does not have a database collecting information about the total number of police involved shootings each year, it’s estimated that between 500 and 1,000 Americans are killed by police officers each year. Since 9/11, about 5,000 Americans have been killed by U.S. police officers, which is almost equivalent to the number of U.S. soldiers who have been killed in the line of duty in Iraq.

US Police Have Killed Over 5,000 Civilians Since 9/11


A Georgia police officer won’t be charged in the fatal shooting of a teenager holding a video game controller — even though a previous grand jury found the use of force was not authorized.

A grand jury in Bartow County declined to indict Cpl. Beth Gatny, of Euharlee police, in the February shooting death of 17-year-old Christopher Roupe.

Police said the teen pointed a gun at one of them Feb. 14, when officers knocked on the door of his family’s mobile home to serve a warrant to Roupe’s father on a probation violation.


No charges for GA cop with questionable past in fatal shooting of teen holding Wii controller
 

Sportello

Well-Known Member
No but if you are innocent why run?
I can imagine a thousand scenarios, none of which apply to me, personally. In a police society, no one is ever 'truly innocent'. Sometimes there are bogus fines that lead to jail time, and taking a chance running from a possibly lazy LEO may seem like a good idea for a moment. after all, things have never gone well in any previous contact with LEO's for the majority of the people we are talking about.

You get apprehended, you will go to jail on some possibly bogus charge, lose that job you finally got, and likely lose your home, be it as it may, too.

Like I said, I can envision thousands of reasons for someone to flee. Decision making is based on experiences, and not everyone has had good experiences to base decisions on.
 

Babagounj

Strength through joy
Where would be the cries for justice if the police shot and killed a black woman who was driving her car while her infant child was in the back seat , her only crime was that she made an illegal u-turn ?
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
I saw this clip and the praise was well deserved. Just goes to show that lethal force is not always the first and most certainly not the best option available.
I admire the cop for his restraint, but had it been me I probably would have shot the guy once I had tripped and fallen backwards. Flat on your back and no longer able to retreat is a bad spot to be in when you are confronted by a psycho. I am glad for all concerned that it turned out the way that it did but I hope other officers who are confronted with similar situations are not going to automatically be expected to react the same way.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
I admire the cop for his restraint, but had it been me I probably would have shot the guy once I had tripped and fallen backwards. Flat on your back and no longer able to retreat is a bad spot to be in when you are confronted by a psycho. I am glad for all concerned that it turned out the way that it did but I hope other officers who are confronted with similar situations are not going to automatically be expected to react the same way.

The cops restraint was admirable but he would have been justified if he used lethal force.
 

wayfair

swollen member
I admire the cop for his restraint, but had it been me I probably would have shot the guy once I had tripped and fallen backwards. Flat on your back and no longer able to retreat is a bad spot to be in when you are confronted by a psycho. I am glad for all concerned that it turned out the way that it did but I hope other officers who are confronted with similar situations are not going to automatically be expected to react the same way.

had the guy pulled a knife... dead cop
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
As long as he had the ability to continue retreating, I might agree with you.

Once he was flat on his back, he would have had every right to blast the guy. He had already backpedaled 50+ yards and repeatedly yelled at the guy to stop and show his hands, to no avail. One good kick to the face or stomp to the head, and that cop could have been knocked out cold and deprived of his gun. Neither the officer nor the community at large could afford to let that happen.
 
Top