Another SYG Killing

ZappasGuitar said:
You're delusional.

Right...escorting little children across the street is no more dangerous than shooting it out with bank robbers.

Such incredible stupidity and from one who considers himself SmarterThanYou.
Click to expand...

numerous people have posted articles about the danger involved in being a police officer. danger which doesn't even put them in the top 10 of most dangerous jobs in America. don't even begin to think you know any different.
 
tekkychick said:
The average citizen is rarely in a position where they might shoot an innocent bystander.

Police officers are often in an emotional situation, danger happening all around, and having to make split second decisions. Some of those decisions go wrong.

Now, do we have to hold them more accountable for bad decisions? When they shoot a drunk guy on a stairway who had a pink fake gun and was mostly passed out? Yeah. They're accountable.

But there are situations where so much is going on that cops will do something they shouldn't and they shouldn't be punished for that.

We need better police review boards that don't automatically excuse officers no matter what they do; that doesn't mean officers should never be exonerated though.
Click to expand...
you started out extremely naive. amadou diallo had a cellphone and was killed. nobody held accountable. Sal Culosi was completely unarmed on his porch when he was 'accidentally' shot through the heart. no accountability. there are dozens more cases like this, every year. cases where the wrong home was raided and innocents killed, or cases where police shot blindly through a door for fear that the person behind it was armed. no accountability. Now, if you want review boards, you need to give them teeth. you need to keep former cops or cop family members off of them.

and most of all, you need to apply the standard equally to cops AND civilians.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
of course, but you want to apply stricter standards to me and relaxed standards to someone who is supposed to be 'trained'. how does that work in your mind?
Click to expand...

Once again...police receive EXTENSIVE training before being sent out to DO THEIR JOB.

YOU may have some training but you have NOT been hired to protect & serve...if you still feel the need to play cops and robbers despite the fact it's not your job, then you need to be punished when you injure an innocent bystander.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Once again...police receive EXTENSIVE training before being sent out to DO THEIR JOB.

YOU may have some training but you have NOT been hired to protect & serve...if you still feel the need to play cops and robbers despite the fact it's not your job, then you need to be punished when you injure an innocent bystander.
Click to expand...
zappa, what is it you refuse to see here? you TRAIN cops so that they make less mistakes on the job, not so you can hand them mulligans. if that EXTENSIVE training isn't to avoid shooting innocent bystanders, what the fuck is it doing?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you started out extremely naive. amadou diallo had a cellphone and was killed. nobody held accountable. Sal Culosi was completely unarmed on his porch when he was 'accidentally' shot through the heart. no accountability. there are dozens more cases like this, every year. cases where the wrong home was raided and innocents killed, or cases where police shot blindly through a door for fear that the person behind it was armed. no accountability. Now, if you want review boards, you need to give them teeth. you need to keep former cops or cop family members off of them.

and most of all, you need to apply the standard equally to cops AND civilians.
Click to expand...

Where did I say police shouldn't be held accountable? I agree with you that the review boards need to be a lot stronger. I said police should be held accountable.

BUT police face danger a lot more often than civilians; and therefore there will be times they "screw up" but shouldn't lose their jobs due to circumstances. So there should be different standards for police vs civilians.

But yes, wrong homes raided, Amadou Diallo, etc - kick those cops off the force.
 
tekkychick said:
Where did I say police shouldn't be held accountable? I agree with you that the review boards need to be a lot stronger. I said police should be held accountable.

BUT police face danger a lot more often than civilians; and therefore there will be times they "screw up" but shouldn't lose their jobs due to circumstances. So there should be different standards for police vs civilians.
Click to expand...
i'm going to ask you again, why do we train police officers 'extensively' if it isn't to prevent mistakes?

tekkychick said:
But yes, wrong homes raided, Amadou Diallo, etc - kick those cops off the force.
Click to expand...
and yet, they get passes. do you protest these non accountability incidents? do you write and/or talk to your legislators about righting the wrongness of these incidents? or do you ignore them in order not to be labeled a cop hater?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
zappa, what is it you refuse to see here? you TRAIN cops so that they make less mistakes on the job, not so you can hand them mulligans. if that EXTENSIVE training isn't to avoid shooting innocent bystanders, what the fuck is it doing?
Click to expand...

For once you got something right...we train the police so they will make LESS mistakes.

Sure, I'd love to believe that with enough training, they might make NO mistakes, but I'm not as NAIVE as you appear to be and I have never said they should go mistake free once trained.

When faced with spur of the moment, life-or-death situations, from time to time, like it or not MISTAKES WILL BE MADE.

We pay the police to take risks you and I would never take and put themselves in those dangerous situations...maybe for once you can stop playing Monday Morning Quarterback and give them the tiniest bit of slack once in a while.
 
The fact is that if someone wanted to get away with murder in Florida all they really need to do is get the victim to hold a stick/rake/shovel/knife up above their head before they shoot him. Then remember when the police arrive to say you were in fear for your life.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
For once you got something right...we train the police so they will make LESS mistakes.

Sure, I'd love to believe that with enough training, they might make NO mistakes, but I'm not as NAIVE as you appear to be and I have never said they should go mistake free once trained.

When faced with spur of the moment, life-or-death situations, from time to time, like it or not MISTAKES WILL BE MADE.
Click to expand...
i'll ask the same question you avoided before. If I, as an air traffic controller, make a mistake on the job, do I suffer? or do I get a pass because I do a job not many others would be willing to do?

ZappasGuitar said:
We pay the police to take risks you and I would never take and put themselves in those dangerous situations...maybe for once you can stop playing Monday Morning Quarterback and give them the tiniest bit of slack once in a while.
Click to expand...
and maybe for once you could stop being a police apologist and face reality. PEOPLE are often put in to dangerous situations, through no fault of their own, yet you want to apply a stricter standard of liability to them than you do for police. are police officers better class citizens? worthy of better protection of the laws than you or I?
 
Jarod said:
The fact is that if someone wanted to get away with murder in Florida all they really need to do is get the victim to hold a stick/rake/shovel/knife up above their head before they shoot him. Then remember when the police arrive to say you were in fear for your life.
Click to expand...
it often works for police the same way. right?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
ok, how 'expert' or extensive do you think their training should be? and would it change your standards of differences between their mistakes and a civilians?
Click to expand...

They should receive fourth level Jedi training. How do you expect me to answer that? It should be better in many cases. No, it would not change the standards however, the PD should be held punitive damages for mistakes if their training is inadequate.

SmarterthanYou said:
but WHY??? if they are put in the same exact situation as a cop that injures bystanders, why should someone be liable for injuries suffered by bystanders for defending their own lives? why should someone with 'training' be given greater leeway for the same mistakes?
Click to expand...

Douchebag, I answered already. They should be SUBJECT to liability because they shot an innocent bystander. Obviously, the details should determine the outcome but that is for a court to handle and sort out. But why???

SmarterthanYou said:
this would be another issue, though very comparable. some people want gun owners to carry million dollar liability policies to be able to carry a gun in public. why should a cop be any different then?
Click to expand...

The police department will cover their liability. Are you suggesting that citizens should be forced to carry an insurance policy? If a citizen's job requires them to use a gun I bet the employer has insurance and probably is required to in many areas.

SmarterthanYou said:
we either fix the issue one step at a time, or you can try to revamp the entire process. the latter is not really possible or it would have been started already.
Click to expand...

What you are arguing for seems to be a radical change that only treats a symptom without any promise. I am advocating one step at a time with a focus on the actual source of the problems.
 
Professor Baxter said:
They should receive fourth level Jedi training. How do you expect me to answer that? It should be better in many cases. No, it would not change the standards however, the PD should be held punitive damages for mistakes if their training is inadequate.
Click to expand...
then you simply don't believe in holding them to a higher standard at all.

Professor Baxter said:
Douchebag, I answered already. They should be SUBJECT to liability because they shot an innocent bystander. Obviously, the details should determine the outcome but that is for a court to handle and sort out. But why???
Click to expand...
and you simply don't believe in equal protection under the law. it also means that you don't want the responsibility of dealing with the issue. you 'feel' what you 'feel' and want the courts to be the adult.

Professor Baxter said:
The police department will cover their liability. Are you suggesting that citizens should be forced to carry an insurance policy? If a citizen's job requires them to use a gun I bet the employer has insurance and probably is required to in many areas.
Click to expand...
I am not suggesting that citizens be required to carry an insurance policy for exercising a right. others are, but not me. and where do you think the departments budget comes from? again, I don't believe you are knowledgable enough for this debate.

Professor Baxter said:
What you are arguing for seems to be a radical change that only treats a symptom without any promise. I am advocating one step at a time with a focus on the actual source of the problems.
Click to expand...
maybe you can explain how forcing accountability for an individuals actions and providing equal protection under the law for ALL people is only treating a symptom without any promise? no, never mind. I don't believe you can do that.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
then you simply don't believe in holding them to a higher standard at all.

and you simply don't believe in equal protection under the law. it also means that you don't want the responsibility of dealing with the issue. you 'feel' what you 'feel' and want the courts to be the adult.

I am not suggesting that citizens be required to carry an insurance policy for exercising a right. others are, but not me. and where do you think the departments budget comes from? again, I don't believe you are knowledgable enough for this debate.

maybe you can explain how forcing accountability for an individuals actions and providing equal protection under the law for ALL people is only treating a symptom without any promise? no, never mind. I don't believe you can do that.
Click to expand...

You are an idiot. This has nothing to do with equal protection under the law. Police should be subject to liability and possible criminal negligence. However, it differs from the standards used to judge a citizen because of the nature of their job just as other factors that I previously discussed can influence liability. Our skillsets and training have an influence on the activities we can reasonably assume to be able to perform safely.

So you want cops to carry insurance that you would not require for a citizen? Why?

A police departments budget comes from the government or taxpayers. Where do you think it comes from, dumbass? Where do you think the extra pay is going to come from to compensate them for the individual insurance policies? I don't see how that is going to make things any better and as I pointed out it might make it easier for the police departments to ignore training and discipline while enabling them to pressure officers to act more aggressively.

Instead we need to get rid of the many laws that require intrusive and aggressive police actions because of their victimless nature.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
No...only cowards need a gun to settle a dispute.

You know...like that coward who needed to stick a gun in some smoker's face for the treasonous crime of smoking in public?
Click to expand...
Here's some stories about these "cowards" that you would rather had been victims than saved themselves and others,

June 12

72 Year Old Grandmother Uses .357 Mag to Open Fire on Home Invader, Saving Her WW2 Veteran Husband
http://gunssavelives.net/self-defen...-home-invader-saving-her-ww2-veteran-husband/

May 6
California Concealed Carrier Captures Suspected Murderer at Gunpoint, Holds Him for Police
http://gunssavelives.net/self-defen...ed-murderer-at-gunpoint-holds-him-for-police/

July 25
Homeowner Shoots Home Invaders Multiple Times After They Tried to Use Fake Gun
http://gunssavelives.net/self-defen...tiple-times-after-they-tried-to-use-fake-gun/

February 14
[Video] Pregnant Mother Saved by 87 Year Old Landlord Who Shot Man Who Chased and Beat Her
http://gunssavelives.net/self-defen...andlord-who-shot-man-who-chased-and-beat-her/

I can do this all day long. That last story, you would prefer that the pregnant woman be a victim rather than that "coward" shooting her assailant.
 
zappa is well known for his hoplophobia forcing him to call anyone using a gun at any time, for anything, other than someone being paid by the government to keep order and protect society, as a coward. people that use their fists to settle anything are superheros.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top