We just need to scrap the whole Police System and replace it with the Judge System like in the Judge Dredd magazine.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Political Discussion Thread
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by SoulReaver View Postnb. in civilized countries the law states that defence must be proportionate to attack (this also applies to the SS not just civilians). that means shooting the attacker only if the attacker either has a gun, or has a knife/other deadly melee weapon at close range
here the guy must've "attacked" the copper verbally - or maybe with his fists, at any rate he was unarmed but all the same the copper "defended" himself the only way those of his ilk know, with his gun (knowing he was protected by the law, it's easy to be brave when you're both armed and above the law isn't it)
there's also the small detail about the victim being in his own home; but to hell with the castle doctrine, whether at home or not it appears aserfcitizen's life only belongs to the government
but I agree colour has nothing to do with this, it's more a question of caste
But the "live scene" with police is neither the time and place to resolve those issues. That time is later, in the courts.
The only thing attacking a police officer gets you is a heap of trouble, if you're lucky. If you're unlucky, it gets you dead.
This is not the fault of the police, it is the result of a stupid decision on the part of the person attacking a police officer.
Comment
-
yeah man it ain't the copper's fault if he responded to an unarmed attack, with his gun
I mean what else could he do? :/
Originally posted by Annoyed View PostOh, I am well aware that the police and other law enforcement agencies (as well as other aspects of govt. in general) overstep their legal authority all too often. I'm really disappointed that the population as a whole is responding to this with an emphatic "Yawn".
But the "live scene" with police is neither the time and place to resolve those issues. That time is later, in the courts.
The only thing attacking a police officer gets you is a heap of trouble, if you're lucky. If you're unlucky, it gets you dead.
This is not the fault of the police, it is the result of a stupid decision on the part of the person attacking a police officer.
btw the only testimony for this alleged attack is from the copper himself
(the other witness would've been the victim who's conveniently dead)
so ultimately the only stupid decision on the part of the victim is that he was at the wrong place at the wrong time: he should never have been at home. hopefully this will teach other citizens a valuable lesson!
Comment
-
Originally posted by SoulReaver View Postyeah man it ain't the copper's fault if he responded to an unarmed attack, with his gun
I mean what else could he do? :/
in the absence of separation of powers, responding to this via the courts is as useful as a yawn
Comment
-
Originally posted by Annoyed View PostSo citizens are supposed to sacrifice themselves to make a point?
Or do you expect police to stop defending themselves?
in fact the SS should retain the right to use armed lethal force especially when breaking into an unarmed citizen's home & finding themselves in the face of mortal danger from the occupant's verbal abuse (or fists) - after all coppers represent the State, and the State is always right
(God bless america, 9/11 never forget, terrorists etc.)
Comment
-
What about that raid in Volusia USA where the cops used a whole SWAT team just to issue a warrant and in the process a young unarmed man got shot in the face.... In the face.
http://www.mynews13.com/content/news..._volusia_.htmlGo home aliens, go home!!!!
Comment
-
I'm not saying that various police-like agencies always follow the rules. They don't. Many of them are completely out of control in many ways. This needs to be challenged at every opportunity.
But the proper way to challenge them is NOT by attacking the police officers at the "live scene". That will only get you shot. If you feel like your rights are being ignored, comply with the officer's orders, and then politely object to whatever you feel the violation is. Or wait till it goes to court, and fight the battle there.
Enter the fight with your head and your words, not with your fists and weapons.
Police have a tough job; they have to walk into situations where angels would quite properly fear to tread. We cannot hamstring their ability to defend themselves against attack or very quickly, we wouldn't have anyone willing to do the job, and where would we be then?
Comment
-
It's fascinating that our local force has no issues at not shooting at the first sign of trouble.
You make it sound like that's the only action they should take - the ever so favorite "shoot first, ask questions later"-mantra.Heightmeyer's Lemming -- still the coolest Lemming of the forum
Proper Stargate Rewatch -- season 10 of SG-1
Comment
-
Originally posted by jelgate View PostI miss the old fashioned pepper spray grenades. Those were the daysHeightmeyer's Lemming -- still the coolest Lemming of the forum
Proper Stargate Rewatch -- season 10 of SG-1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Coco Pops View Post
that's one lucky SOB
But the proper way to challenge them is NOT by attacking the police officers at the "live scene". That will only get you shot
although admittedly it's better to wear a bullet-proof vest (at the rate things are going, in a not too distant future all civies may have to wear these. lol)
Police have a tough job
if they can shoot first regardless if target's armed or not without having to worry about the law then this kinda takes away the 'tough' factor
not to mention the colossal pay (at state & federal level anyway) and quality health insurance (while most yanks can barely afford basic care)
and that's leaving aside the lifetime job guarantee (even after a deadly mistake they don't get fired like other workers would at the slightest fault, but instead get rewarded withvacationpaid administrative leave)
btw reality check: their job's not to protect you
on the other hand living as a lowly citizen in the US, now that's tough & takes a lot of bravery. lol
the only things that sort of restores balance are the "blue on blue" accidents - when a copper mistakenly shoots an undercover comrade for instance - thank god for these cause this forces them to be at least somewhat careful whom they're shooting (they may not care about citizens but they don't like shooting their own) so as a result more potential civilian victims are avoided
We cannot hamstring their ability to defend themselves against attack or very quickly, we wouldn't have anyone willing to do the job, and where would we be then?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Falcon Horus View PostIt's fascinating that our local force has no issues at not shooting at the first sign of trouble.
You make it sound like that's the only action they should take - the ever so favorite "shoot first, ask questions later"-mantra.
Comment
-
You & your partner are both armed with a club, pepper spray, tazer, and handgun. You arrive at a scene where you encounter a distraught, angry, and/or mentally disturbed man wielding a large knife. You tell him to drop the knife. He doesn't. Do you:
a) render him sightless with pepper spray
b) immobilize him with a Tazer
c) kill him with your handgun
Comment
Comment