Originally posted by Adam_PoE👆 Bingo!
Police do not need to protect themselves from people who are restrained on the ground, fascist boot-licker.
Originally posted by BackFireThing is Trump wants to fight this election on law and order. The problem, anyone can see he is stoking division and making it worse. He is preaching to his fanbase, no more nor less. I dont see this strategy working.
Cops are a virus.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
It is very telling that you think the natural and expected consequence of resisting arrest is murder.If someone does not wear a face covering, he risks inhaling respiratory droplets containing viral particles.
The virus is indiscriminate, and infects because that is what it does.
Likewise, your entire argument is contingent upon police officers indiscriminately murdering people, because that is what they do.
You either have a bad opinion of police officers or a very low standard for them.
So no, you won't be consistent. All I needed to know 👆
Originally posted by Silent Master
That's not the scenario Surtur put forth, your massive bias is showing again.
His scenario only works if he thinks police officers are murders, and being murdered is a natural and expected consequences of resisting them. Such a lovely opinion of American law enforcement.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
His scenario only works if he thinks police officers are murders, and being murdered is a natural and expected consequences of resisting them. Such a lovely opinion of American law enforcement.
There are several scenarios where one could be justifiably murdered for resisting arrest. If the perpetrator resists by trying to kill police officers for instance, although that was not the case in some of these inexcusable deaths.
Originally posted by Artol
I think that the punishment for resisting arrest should not be being shot or worse killed. If someone is killed by police it should automatically trigger an investigation and the sole excuse of "they were resisting arrest" should not be sufficient to not face consequences.
Talk more about this.
Do you have video evidence of properly trained police in Norway or Belgium, handling a person resisting arrest, and successfully resolving the situation without lots of harm to the suspect/arrestee?
That would make your point very solid.
People (Americans visiting) talk about the police in Norway and Belgium being badass.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Talk more about this.Do you have video evidence of properly trained police in Norway or Belgium, handling a person resisting arrest, and successfully resolving the situation without lots of harm to the suspect/arrestee?
That would make your point very solid.
People (Americans visiting) talk about the police in Norway and Belgium being badass.
I don't have such videos, nor have I seen them. I don't really know statistics about specific countries, although it seems that in European countries police use their firearms (if they even carry any) considerably less, and it comes to much fewer lethal altercations. I would suspect there are a lot of reasons that can affect that, in the UK patrol officers don't carry guns for example, in some other countries each bullet fired needs to be individually accounted for in a bureaucratic process, perhaps there's also better training in some countries, and then we can't overlook the social aspects, it's possible that having more developed welfare states lowers the risk of lethal interactions with police, and of course the prevalence of firearms is much lower in European countries. But again, I was more speaking in idealistic terms, I don't think people that resist arrest should be killed, and I think that the police, which is imbued with the power of the people to use force, needs to be held to a much higher standard when applying that force.
Originally posted by Artol
I don't have such videos, nor have I seen them.
Damn. I really wish you did. Because your point will not stick in these types of arguments until we have evidence that there is a better way to police in comparable situations.
I would love it if someone could find this evidence so I can use it over and over and over to show why they are more effective (and far less deadly) in their countries. They have far higher standards for their police than we do.
Originally posted by Artol
I don't really think a video is good evidence of what I'm proposing, although I agree that it would likely be one of the most effective thing to convince people in a discussion.
I am thinking of an example of what the 'better policing' looks like, not a cherry picked example.
So you can start the convo with a skeptic or critic and by providing the examples of both scenarios. "Here are two very comparable scenarios. 1 resulted in an arrest and rehab program where the person successful integrated back into society and has a job. The person died during the police confrontation. Exhibit A is part of a set of standards the Belgium uses to arrest and detain law breakers. Exhibit B is an example of the lack of training and de-escalation procedures."
Humans are emotional. They are not like you and I that can be swayed by facts and science when the science and facts are solid. Most people are NOT like that. They need to see violence or the lack of violence in intellectually honest comparisons.
Originally posted by Surtur
Look at all this social distancing, pews aren't even 6 feet apart. John Lewis funeral:I am noting the pew spacing because I know weasels would try to say those sitting next to each other in the same pew and not social distancing are probably from the same household. As you can see, that is irrelevant 🙂
I'm still wondering why this is okay. They didn't social distance.
I recognize that back whenever the church was built they didn't build these pews with a pandemic in mind, but the fact is there is very little social distancing truly going on. The rows of pews aren't far enough apart for that to be possible.
Other people have had to forego funerals for their loved ones, I don't think John Lewis is better than those people. And then to exempt politicians from quarantine rules, while expecting other citizens to oblige? Why should they obey? Someone give a valid answer please. And to be clear "cuz democrats say so" isn't a valid answer.
The North Texas Poison Center is again warning people that drinking bleach will not prevent, treat, or cure COVID-19, following 46 cases of people ingesting the chemical since the beginning of August for precisely those reasons.
The NTPC pointed to "misleading and inaccurate information circulating online" for the increase in poisonings.
They warn that while you can reduce the spread of coronavirus by cleaning and disinfecting frequently-touched surfaces with bleach, you should never drink it under any circumstances.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The North Texas Poison Center is again warning people that drinking bleach will not prevent, treat, or cure COVID-19, following 46 cases of people ingesting the chemical since the beginning of August for precisely those reasons.The NTPC pointed to "misleading and inaccurate information circulating online" for the increase in poisonings.
They warn that while you can reduce the spread of coronavirus by cleaning and disinfecting frequently-touched surfaces with bleach, you should never drink it under any circumstances.
Trump is literally poisoning his own supporters via insane lies.