CE Derail Thread: a flag with a cop pistol whipping a dead horse

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > CE Derail Thread: a flag with a cop pistol whipping a dead horse

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

The Falcons would have beat the Patriots if they had put Bernie Sanders in at corner back.

# ¿ May 27, 2017 17:37

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 5, 2024 12:41

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

CHICKEN SHOES posted:

also i'm hardly a survivalist nutjob but if they start confiscating guns even that kinda sets my alarms off regarding the bill of rights and all

It's pretty hosed up on a lot of levels if a government says, "we definitely don't want you to have individual access to the means to protect yourself, because y'all can't be trusted to handle it, but we don't care if you vote."

# ¿ Jun 23, 2017 18:07

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Ooh man, it's gonna be super awkward at the office next week.

Put up pictures of Roland Pryzbylewski as "Officer of the Month."

# ¿ Jun 24, 2017 20:31

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

AreWeDrunkYet posted:

Trying to get this thread back on track for its original purpose - bad political debates using specious assumptions:

Let's say it could be empirically determined that a specific change in law enforcement processes (stricter ROE for example) would increase police deaths from intentional assault by 10% (so about 8 extra dead cops a year at current rates), but the number of people killed by law enforcement would experience a corresponding 10% drop (so about 100-130 non-cop lives saved). Should that process change be implemented?

The huge flaw in your premise is the assumption that everyone shot by the cops should not have been shot. (Also the assumption that everyone who dies in their interactions with the police dies from a deliberate use of force by the police.)

# ¿ Jun 25, 2017 16:26

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Victor Vermis posted:

Relax. Being murdered by a 12 year old wielding a shovel and a jug of PME isn't a qualifying attribute for identifying an unredeemable dipshit.

Too bad stainless steel grief-bling and gaudy memorial tats aren't visible in our digital sacred space. Here I am, shop-lighting a fatal flaw, totally ignorant to the fact that someone on a subforum of broke-brain veterans may have had occasion to salute a poster-printed photo of their battle buddy under company color and desert sun while strains of Eternal Father emanate from a boombox.

My bad.

College dun you good, vicky boy.

# ¿ Jun 30, 2017 08:26

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

If we're doing 4th dimensional psychosocial chess, it's equally possible the department will close ranks around him because the optics of throwing a minority officer to the wolves are real bad. I personally think it's all going to turn one way or the other on the details of the event, but I'm an optimist.

# ¿ Jul 18, 2017 09:18

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

The Gun control chat thread, if you will
(IT IS A TERRIBLE IDEA AND DOESN'T WORK)

# ¿ Jul 19, 2017 03:02

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Smiling Jack posted:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_subway_sarin_attack

Bluntly, not as effective as shooting / ramming attakcs.

If you half-rear end the dispersion of your chemical weapons, yeah. Hopefully people with nerve gas and bad intentions will be so incompetent in the future.

# ¿ Oct 2, 2017 21:51

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

M_Gargantua posted:

How often has a suspect accurately shot from the hip? This isn't a western and the perp isn't John Wayne. Practicing snapshots from a stable position with your gun loose at your side is one thing, drawing a concealed weapon while often crouched or just at a weird angle is another, and on adrenaline.

The more I see these videos the more i'm starting to think that forcing officers to take a moment to register a weapon won't move the needle on annual uniform deaths. I'm curious, if you separate out the statistics for officer fatalities when confronting suspects already armed and brandishing, vs those who attempt to draw once already in a low intensity alternation with the police, what you'll find...

In a lot of cases, you're talking about hallway distances. It doesn't take Anne Oakley for a person to start dumping bullets in the general direction of "those cops" and let the law of averages be his guide. Action is going to beat reaction every time, and I don't think it's reasonable to ask the police to gamble on aggressors being a bad shot in the name of public interest.

I also think the "reasonable belief" standard is workable, but a lot of people (and jurors) don't understand it.

45 ACP CURES NAZIS posted:

If any of these sort of incidents were committed by some sort of UN peace keeping force we would be seeing IRA type response to this poo poo. Instead its just cops, they get away with it, and we don't do a god drat thing. If some cop killed my wife like that I'd go extremely buck wild with a nail gun on his family.

Uh, OK. A lot to unpack there.

# ¿ Dec 11, 2017 06:29

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Seems weird to me that people in the military forum are outraged that armed agents of the state charged with making life or death decisions may get it wrong sometimes and kill the wrong people on the basis of imperfect knowledge, without any malice or having committed a crime.

# ¿ Dec 12, 2017 07:21

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Mr. Nice! posted:

There's a difference between a mistake and what happened to shaver, castile, or any other number of people senselessly murdered for no reason.

People on the last page were arguing that police needed to wait until they could see and somehow empirically verify the presence of a gun rather than the current ~~"reasonable belief"~~ probable cause standard, (E: thank you Smiling Jack, got those two confused for a sec) because too many unarmed people were getting killed. That's a rather different complaint than the idea that the police are maliciously killing people and being inadequately prosecuted.

McNally posted:

Pretty sure I had stricter ROE in Iraq than most cops do.

Not really, no. This is how high risk warrant service and barricaded suspects are handled in the GWOT:

And I'm pretty sure cops aren't allowed to shoot anyone they see wearing gang colors as uniformed members of a hostile force, or break into suspects' homes at 3 AM and kidnap them.

It doesn't really matter though, because warfighting and civilian law enforcement are an apples to oranges comparison.

Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 08:28 on Dec 13, 2017

# ¿ Dec 13, 2017 07:07

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

boop the snoot posted:

Yeah they deserve to be homeless.

Or die.

Whatever it�s hilarious either way.

There are way too many people on this rock suffering from poo poo beyond their control to get upset about the ones who bring it on themselves by ignoring qualified experts and basic logic.

# ¿ Dec 24, 2017 08:46

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Kawasaki Nun posted:

Same goes for probation officers being huge failures

That seems like a really random axe to grind. Then again, I've never met a PO.

# ¿ Dec 31, 2017 08:01

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

mlmp08 posted:

That's a pretty impossible standard to put on cops. "Always shoot first, but only if you know the person is a threat" requires X-Ray vision, Spidey senses, and a host of other super powers. It would also imply that in literally every active shooter scenario, the cops were "late" and that's a really pointless standard to set in a world where the pre-crime unit is science fiction.

You're the one who thinks the cops should have to verify that the erratic suspect who they were told was armed has in fact pulled out a gun and not a wallet or cell phone. I don't think absolute knowledge should be a requirement, merely a reasonable perception of imminent danger based on the totality of the circumstances.

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 01:13

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

mlmp08 posted:

This is a statement that in no ways whatsoever addresses what I said.

The only reason you think it's an impossible standard is because you believe the police should have to have empirical proof of the presence of a gun before using lethal force.

mlmp08 posted:

Th punishment for noncompliance: death without trial.

It isn't a punishment.

Kawasaki Nun posted:

Yeah I really want dipshit cops making life or death decisions based on their perception of other people's intentions. You do realize that the standard youre articulating already exists right? Why do you have to whine so much to try and justify the dog poo poo status quo?

Because your complaints about the status quo are unreasonable. Culpability has to be based on perception for the law to make sense.

# ¿ Jan 8, 2018 22:56

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 5, 2024 12:41

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Smiling Jack posted:

"well regulated militia"

this is the part where you try and claim every white male 16-40 is technically part of a militia

The right is reserved to the people, not the Militia.

Plus, the framers empowered Congress to issue letters of marque and reprisal, so clearly they considered the idea that private individuals would be able to own not just small arms, but warships and cannon.

# ¿ Mar 27, 2018 02:48

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > CE Derail Thread: a flag with a cop pistol whipping a dead horse