cop killer

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by sifreak21, Dec 21, 2014.

  1. sifreak21 Valued Senior Member

    Well for one I think in the media it's ironic if you kill a cop the present it as it is. Murder. But if cops murder citizens. They were defending themselves. Is it fair to say I'm not suprised this happened if true. Due to all the injustice by cops recently. Garner, brown, crawford, parker.. and others.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Bells Staff Member

    Umm, those police officers were executed. This guy walked up to their car and shot them while they were sitting in their car. There is no justification for this. Absolutely none.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. sifreak21 Valued Senior Member

    Bells I did not anywhere insinuate it was justafied. I stated im not suprised it happened with all of the injustice that has recently happened. And this is no way to get a point across. I just wonder if our justice system worked properly if this could have been avoided
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. wellwisher Banned Banned

    The liberal demonstrations were fueled by a couple of examples of the police killing black victims to create a stereotype that the leaders, like Sharpton, applied to all police. The inevitable result were a couple of random police officers being executed, since they came under the blanket of the stereo type.

    Should the police use the same liberal tactic to stereo type the entire black race based on this one example and then make their own random victim, even if no direct cause and effect can be found, like just happened? Can the police also loot stores if they can extrapolate the stereotype, like the liberals did and do?
  8. sifreak21 Valued Senior Member

    Well please keep political bull^/#% out of here this is justice subform not political so don't bring it in. Thank you

    A couple examples?

    Your's just a couple I and I could go on forever..
    now we cannot group all police in this group. But we need to start prosecuting officers that are way out of line
  9. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    OK let us say there was bad cops out there and they did wrong. You must remember that not all of them are bad. What gives the right for anyone to execute a cop that has done absolutely nothing wrong? If you are angry at the cops who did the shootings that's one thing but to kill police that have done no harm to anyone can't be tolerated. I'm very sad about the deaths of the people that police have shot but to kill any police without them doing anything is just simply wrong.
  10. Bells Staff Member

    The guy apparently also shot his girlfriend before he murdered those two police officers.

    Seems to me he wanted to go out with a bang and he was looking for any excuse.

    I think he'd have done it even if the Brown and Garner deaths had never happened. The justice system could have been perfect and everything was hunky dory.

    And frankly, using the deaths of two people as an excuse to walk up to a police car and shoot to officers sitting in their car.. I'm sorry, but what kind of sick and twisted person does something like that? Police could have shot or strangled 100 Brown's and Garner's. What he did was not acceptable at all and it makes him a murderer. Regardless of what he felt his justifications were.

    There are no justifications for what he did.

    Did he think he would improving matters by doing what he did? Improving relations between the populace and police officers? He's set everything back about 20 years.. His actions will have made it worse. There are legal avenues, you do things legally. You don't murder people.
  11. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Unfortunately, we've seen this week that a certain pattern is still in place.

    (A) There is a larger problem taking place in police departments all over the country.

    (B) This murder has little, if anything at all, to do with those problems.

    (C) Yet we are expected to stop having any problems with police departments whatsoever because, well, someone shot cops.​

    Why would good, noble police officers exploit this tragedy as some badges have?

    "Once again, we need to be reminded that the men and women of law enforcement are absolutely the only entity standing between a civilized society and one of anarchy and chaos. In that position, we should be supported in our efforts, with continuous diligence, by a strong political leadership. Unfortunately, recently, that has not been the case. Politicians and community leaders from President Obama, to Attorney General Holder, New York Mayor de Blasio, and Al Sharpton have, as the result of their lack of proper guidance, created the atmosphere of unnecessary hostility and peril that police officers now find added to the ordinary danger of their profession. Sadly, the bloodshed will most likely continue until those in positions of power realize that the unequivocal support of law enforcement is required to preserve our nation."

    That's why. Because the police have chosen to remind the public that unequivocal support of law enforcement is required.

    Now, for all we hear about how it's just a few bad seeds and we can't allow our anger and frustration to spill over onto good cops, it seems a simple enough question: Where are those good cops?

    Where is the rank and file reminding the union that their job is to enforce the law, not demand unequivocal support when violating the laws?

    Where are those good cops?

    This is their time to stand up and be known.

    And so far, they are choosing apparent unequivocal support.

    So where are the good cops? They have a chance to show themselves and have full public support. Let us hear from them, so that they might be known and accounted for.

    The silence thus far is not surprising.

    But right now the nation could really use the voices of those good cops.


    WBAL. "Baltimore police union releases statement on NYPD shootings". 21 December 2014. 26 December 2014.
  12. Bells Staff Member

  13. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    On Wanting to Like Law Enforcement

    I don't think people necessarily recognize how public anger toward law enforcement works.

    Imagine you're pushing a tough case, but it just has to be brought. And your witness, your victim, gets up on the stand and brings the house down. Just crushes defense with all the dignity and vice a smart, furious, empowered survivor possibly can.

    And maybe afterwards, some lawyers might actually say it: "I know you don't like prosecutors much. But we adore you right now. Never seen anything like that."

    And the response: "I actually like being able to like prosecutors and law enforcement."

    An awkward moment passes, and your witness continues: "It's a priority thing. Sometimes we disagree. And sometimes that really makes a difference in people's lives."

    And maybe in your corner of the world that would seem like a really weird thing to say to a lawyer who just helped you devastate the criminal who hurt you, but in the U.S., it's the unspoken key to the real discussion behind the political theatrics.

    Every society requires police.

    Every society hates its police.

    Yet this is not necessarily a fixed reality; it does not have to be this way.

    The problem is that the differences between corruption of legend, when the police were just bandits with the right political patronage, and what goes on today aren't sufficient to break the arc of history, culture, and myth. FPOB's statement on unequivocal support of law enforcement actually fits neatly onto the arc; it's very nearly archetypal.

    But that also fits into the counterpoint; we need laws and some way of enforcing them. It's a natural fact of society at this point in the human experience. But in the face of some spectacular awfulness, we're always expected to stop and remember all the good things cops do, and the underlying message is corrosive: It's okay that this person is dead because some other cop somewhere did his job today without fucking up.

    It makes me think of when I was young and certain blocs on the conservative side used to denounce so much of modern society as some manner of hippie invasion. Because there has always been a complaint that stretches from amateur night at the comedy club to genuine, vote-for-me politicking, that complains about kids feeling special for just getting through the day. Citizenship ribbons at day camp, and the like, you know? I still know people who think "a school where students can't get an F" means they simply give everybody passing grades, yet compared to the schools I went to the functional difference on the ground is apparent; they're eliminating the idea of getting through on grade point yet being able to advance while failing a class. Nobody fails because they're not allowed to. The intention is the exact opposite of the complaint.

    So where does the complaint come from? And why is there such overlap between such outlooks and those who want us to take special time out to be thankful for all the police who didn't screw up their jobs today because, you know, it's just not fair to think about the fact of a homicide with every appearance of someone with a badge fucking up.

    Every once in a while I drag out an obscure thesis about how what we fear in others is some manner of reflection on what we fear about ourselves. And in some cases it is harder to tease out the evidence or the standards of neurotic translation, like really, you're never going to see a hippie supervillain; wake up to take over the world and say, "Fuck it, I'ma get irie." Yeah. I'll get on taking over the world, right after I finish getting high. Hippie supervillain. Never gonna see one. Still, though, the thesis can be reasonably argued to apply to liberalism; I fully admit that it is derived from viewing, not political conservatives, per se, but people who are generally more conservative and culturally patterned than I am.

    Right now it's on naked display in other forms, and a lot of it is blatantly political, like small-government, tinfoil conservatives worried about the intrusive bureaucracy devising TRAP laws. Or the irony of the horrid "legal" justifications for American torture being written by lawyers in the service of a political outlook that happens to hate lawyers for their ability to parse and warp the law without conscience. Or the spectacle of certain vocal Christian movements essentially asserting that they are the victims of inequality if they are not superior under the law.

    And it could be so naked in liberals, too; it generally doesn't seem so, but look where I'm looking from, you know?

    But I'm banking on that at this point; something about this all in or fold approach is starting to seem like a natural behavioral thing with some outlooks. That is to say, the idea that many critics of police and other law enforcement would like to be able to support these institutions doesn't occur on these people's radar because it's not part of how they see the world; they're projecting the absolute dualism onto others, and since the others something something, then something something else.

    And I did the something bit because it makes a point. It's actually a really complicated discussion some days, and as we're well aware, our American political discourse is not well-tuned for subtlety or nuance.

    We don't have to imagine that the police are demanding unequivocal support; cops in Baltimore just did just that. We don't have to pretend that some police just tried suing the federal government on the grounds that it is impossible to do their jobs if they are not allowed to break the law in the course of being police officers. No, really, we don't have to pretend; that just happened in Seattle. And, yes, the complaint got laughed out. And we don't have to imagine a prosecutor tanking the enforcement of the law when the person of interest is a police officer; we just saw that in Missouri. We don't have to make up some fantasy that the police consider the People their enemies; again, Seattle, and we have it in writing.

    Right now there is a reason people are pissed off at the police; this is as ugly as it has been in a long, long time.

    And right now, here are two juxtaposed generalizations: We really need those good cops to stand up and be known, or, Unequivocal support of law enforcement is required.

    Remember, the bloodshed that will continue, by the Fraternal Order's logic, is that people will keep killing cops. We're actually at a point where I am starting to worry that genuine hits against police departments are coming. Societally, we're probably lucky that those most inclined to threaten such violence are actually on the police's side, or else the shooting would likely have begun by now.

    Oh, right. Tell that to Pittsburgh.


    We really need those good cops to stand up, right now, and start breaking the cycle within police departments.

    Think of the drug war. People can complain, "What about the rest of society? Why do you hate the poor, defenseless cops?" except, well, think of the drug war and just how much crime that created. Cleaning up that mess will take generations. And meanwhile those people can explain to me just what a crime-free society looks like; there has never been one in human history and the question of whether there can ever be one is probably a thousand years, at least, from possibility.

    This is a society. It is supposed to be a civilized society. And all civilized societies need both laws and a means of enforcing those laws. We need to be able to support our law enforcement institutions. We want to be able to support our law enforcement institutions.

    But this price? Unequivocal support? No, seriously, what the hell?
  14. Bells Staff Member

    Reminds me of this..

    Mr. de Blasio isn’t going to say it, but somebody has to: With these acts of passive-aggressive contempt and self-pity, many New York police officers, led by their union, are squandering the department’s credibility, defacing its reputation, shredding its hard-earned respect. They have taken the most grave and solemn of civic moments — a funeral of a fallen colleague — and hijacked it for their own petty look-at-us gesture. In doing so, they also turned their backs on Mr. Ramos’s widow and her two young sons, and others in that grief-struck family.

    These are disgraceful acts, which will be compounded if anyone repeats the stunt at Officer Liu’s funeral on Sunday.

    The New York Police Department is going through a terrible time, and the assassinations of those officers only underscore the dreadful dangers that rank-and-file cops face every day. And, in truth, there is some thanklessness to being a cop. Officers often feel beleaguered, jerked around by supervisors and politicians, obligated to follow rules and policies that can be misguided, held responsible for their mistakes in ways that the public is not, exposed to frequent ridicule and hostility from the people they are sworn to serve. It has always been that way with cops.

    But none of those grievances can justify the snarling sense of victimhood that seems to be motivating the anti-de Blasio campaign — the belief that the department is never wrong, that it never needs redirection or reform, only reverence. This is the view peddled by union officials like Patrick Lynch, the president of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association — that cops are an ethically impeccable force with their own priorities and codes of behavior, accountable only to themselves, and whose reflexive defiance in the face of valid criticism is somehow normal.

    It’s not normal. Not for a professional class of highly trained civil servants, which New York’s Finest profess to be. The police can rightly expect, even insist upon, the respect of the public. But respect is a finite resource. It cannot be wasted. Sometimes it has to be renewed.

    The failures of some cops, the misguided policing tactics that feed a sense of oppression in parts of the city, the offensive provocations of some in the police-reform protest movement, and the horrific killings of two officers, have led the city to a dangerous point

    You have to wonder about the police union themselves and frankly, the sheer level of influence they have on officers is worrying.

    In the accidental shooting of an unarmed Akai Gurley, whom police declared was a "complete innocent", who had been descending in the stair well with his girlfriend, by a police officer doing the checks in a stair well, the NYPD learned of the shooting by a police officer when a neighbour called 911 after Gurley and his girlfriend were left to hobble down two floors with the mortally wounded Gurley having to find a neighbour to call the police and paramedics. When superiors tried to contact the two officers involved with the shooting, they were unable to reach them for around 6 minutes. The officer who shot him and his partner? They were too busy texting their union representatives to call for an ambulance for Gurley, or even radio in that there had been a shooting.

    The announcement came as it was revealed by the New York Daily News that an officer involved in the shooting texted his union representative instead of calling for medical assistance in the immediate aftermath of the shooting.

    As rookie officer Peter Liang and his partner entered a darkened stairwell, Liang’s gun discharged and a bullet struck Gurley, who was with his girlfriend on the seventh floor, in the torso.

    Quoting a number of unnamed law enforcement sources, the Daily News said that after the incident, neither Liang nor his partner, Shaun Landau, could be reached by their superiors for more than six minutes. The New York police department (NYPD) reportedly learned of the incident from a neighbour’s 911 call, after which it attempted and failed to reach Liang and Landau.


    A law enforcement source told the Daily News the officers’ decision not to radio for help was mystifying: “The guy is dying and you still haven’t called it in?” The source said Liang and Landau eventually reported an accidental discharge.

    Other sources said officers at the housing development had been explicitly ordered not to patrol the stairwells, a tactic known as “verticals”. After Gurley was shot in the chest, he and his girlfriend hobbled to find help two floors below. Gurley was pronounced dead at Brookdale Hospital later that night

    I suppose we will find out if the officers involved will be indicted. Their complete disregard for the black man they had accidentally shot is obscene, to the point where he and his girlfriend were forced to walk down two floors to find someone to call for paramedics and the police, because they were too busy contacting their union representatives and then doing god knows what for those 6+ minutes where they did not respond to calls from their superiors, surely, that has to count for something in the Grand Jury hearing. Time will tell.

    But it is that concern with contacting their union representatives before following procedure and actually calling for paramedics and informing that they were involved in a shooting that is exceptionally worrying.
  15. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

  16. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Ever wonder why the MEDIA always shows where a black man and a white police officer have problems and the black man is killed? Why don't they show the same thing with white people being killed by the police? Very rare that a police officer doing anything wrong to a white person ever gets a second of MEDIA air time. I understand that the MEDIA wants to create more and more problems and by only showing the few times an officer kills a black man the truth isn't heard about for sometimes months on end but the MEDIA just puts out lies about the incident never wanting to wait for the truth to be sen or heard. The MEDIA are a very sad lot and the only way they attract people is to bend the truth, sensationalize the story or just make up crap as they want to.
  17. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Ever notice how many racists, when defending the police, make complaints about the media and then pretend that the only issue is who shot who and #WhatAboutTheWhitePeople? Why don't these people show some intelligence, or at least basic comprehension of the issues in play? Very rare that they do anything other than try to change the subject. I understand that racists want to create more and more problems between people in order to reinforce their own beliefs about the inferiority of others by pretending everything else is equal in the world, but these people don't want the truth heard and just put out lies because that appears to be the best they can come up with. Racists are very sad lot and the only way they attract people is to bend the truth, sensationalize the story, or just make up crap as they go.

    You know, I recently asked someone to explain to us the details in some incidents listed as a similar, albeit considerably less racist, version of the argument. I have yet to hear back. This is important; pale skin is not usually considered a risk factor for violence.

    Look, man, stop and think about it for a minute. Nobody complained when the cops gunned down Maurice Clemmons, and there is a reason why nobody complained; there is no question he was a lethal danger to the police. It doesn't matter what color the cop who shot him was. Do you get that?

    When the counterpoint is that we should complain about what appears to be, under law, a "good shoot", and just because the dead person is white, it reminds us that the counterpoint is addressing some other subject entirely.

    Our society currently faces a vital problem; stop trying to change the subject.
  18. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    You mean like the media did when they lied about Mr. Brown before they knew the entire story?

    I'm still trying to understand why anything that is a shooting and it concerns a black person we hear about it so much it incites a riot. Should the media be held responsible for all the stores burned down, the broken windows or the injuries caused by lying by the media? We rarely hear about police killing a white person that was a bad shoot but are inundated with sensationalized reports when a black person is. The media rarely tells us the truth, no matter liberal or conservative, which we need to understand what actually, factually happened.
  19. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Unlike private citizens, the police are allowed an exception to the law to perform their duties, that's why there is an inquiry after a police shooting, not (necessarily) an arrest. That's why cops can speed in pursuit of speeders.
  20. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    They did and do. That's the problem, cops are stereotyping blacks too often as criminals.
  21. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Support that assertion.

    Especially odious dishonesty. Consider that I even mentioned a case in which people did not protest the shooting of a black man ... because it was what is considered a "good shoot". And your response is this blanket statement?

    Support your assertions.

    Especially dishonest, all things considered. As I noted:

    You know, I recently asked someone to explain to us the details in some incidents listed as a similar, albeit considerably less racist, version of the argument. I have yet to hear back.​

    And here you are just repeating your assertion with exactly zero support.

    What? That's it? That's all you've got left in your bag o'bigotry?
  22. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    Just out of interest, is there seen any different between State Troopers and County Sheriff's in regards to the concerns? I ask because I know that localised constabularies can be filled with people that are doing the bidding of one particular mind set, this is usually because of the people that voted them in or support their work. In some instances you could have racial radicalist's wearing a policeman's uniform similar to how a hooded Ku Klux Klan member (This is of course a supposition, so don't consider this is factual support that all policeman are undercover clansmen) It wouldn't take much for a group of like minded bigots to control a local constabulary from the inside.

    State troopers to my knowledge are another matter altogether, they are sworn in to protect the people of the state. They are likely vetted and if they have been involved in any wrong doing I'm positive the number of instances is far smaller than that of the potentially locally corrupted forces since they are scrutinised by the state more.

    The problem is though that these speculations currently don't have supporting evidence because evidence needs to be collected, which means it's up to IA (Internal Affairs) to gain access to that information by spying on those constabularies considered to be bigot havens. In the case of localised constabularies I'm sure it's far more difficult for someone to infiltrate under that pretence, since people that aren't local will be less trusted than those that have been known for years.

    One attempted solution to deal with bigotry in police forces is to actually have a "Rotation" similar to what happens in the military. This means that police can only serve a specific community for a set duration of time before they are asked to move to a different constabulary some distance away. This method constantly moves people that aren't directly involve with people in any given area, which in turn removes any ties to what bigotry might otherwise exist. (It lessens it because there is no Alpha archetypes protecting territory, since the territory is only there's for that rotation)
  23. Bells Staff Member


Share This Page