Meanwhile in New York City....

[Belize]

Is it acceptable if one of them is someone you love?

Tell me, what did this kid, or his father do to deserve this?

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.2052450

No stop! That's appeal to emotions and Didactic says it's bad! We can't feel sorry for the families, that would mean poor arguments!

[Stop Pretending]

You do realize the a rag tag militia in Afghanistan and Iraq have been giving our modern military shit fits for the better part of a decade?

A revolt in American, as unlikley as it seems, would not be nearly as one sided as you think.

A revolt by who? Most of America is not opposed to our police force.

[prwraith]

You do realize the a rag tag militia in Afghanistan and Iraq have been giving our modern military shit fits for the better part of a decade?

A revolt in American, as unlikley as it seems, would not be nearly as one sided as you think.

If it ever comes to people shooting at their own government again in this country I think I will leave it entirely. I don't want to be associated with cavemen.

[Endus]

A revolt by who? Most of America is not opposed to our police force.

Talking about a revolution is pretty mind-bogglingly ridiculous. It's predicated on the idea that cops are going to demand to keep their right to oppress and kill the people they are supposed to protect, rather than proper checks and balances being placed upon use of force in the process of police work.

If the police forces of the United States refuse to accept such restrictions, then sure, maybe a revolt would happen. And it would be necessary. Because that's bordering on fascist-police-state territory.

The alternative is that they can admit there's a problem, and work with the communities they serve to work out a proper solution, including restrictions and procedures that the community can accept to curb this kind of violence moving forward.

Compromise and concession are still on the table. And when the side of the public is "stop killing people for no justifiable reason", I really can't see how their expectations are unreasonable.

[prwraith]

A harsher goverment in the face of protest is the halmark of facism and tyranny. And it would only justify (even more so) any acts of violence against it.

You're missing a basic principle. Violence causes more violence. And you would be the initiator of it.

Violence will never end as long as fools endorse it.

[Korel72]

Is it acceptable if one of them is someone you love?

Tell me, what did this kid, or his father do to deserve this?

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.2052450

I personally couldn't care less. If it was my family member then I would be up in arms, but by the same token if I had just lost a family member by the actions of a cop then I probably wouldn't case as much.

But we deal in abstracts, our nation will move beyond this individual case in a matter of weeks/months. We will come to accept these types of things as the cost of doing business in our country until something is done that everyone finds acceptable.

[Endus]

You're missing a basic principle. Violence causes more violence. And you would be the initiator of it.

Violence will never end as long as fools endorse it.

This is a platitude that really doesn't hold up, in practice.

Consider, for instance, the American Revolution. Which wasn't even about oppressive use of force by government agents. It was largely about taxes. And specifically, who got to decide where they got spent.

[Belize]

A harsher goverment in the face of protest is the halmark of facism and tyranny. And it would only justify (even more so) any acts of violence against it.

A harsher government in the light of unjustified killings, encouraged by said protest, is sensible. Unless it's OK to protest the cops deaths and go shoot two random protesters? I mean, it'd be justified right?

[Endus]

A harsher government in the light of unjustified killings, encouraged by said protest, is sensible. Unless it's OK to protest the cops deaths and go shoot two random protesters? I mean, it'd be justified right?

You're literally describing the actions of fascism and pretending they're a valid argument.

[Stop Pretending]

Talking about a revolution is pretty mind-bogglingly ridiculous. It's predicated on the idea that cops are going to demand to keep their right to oppress and kill the people they are supposed to protect, rather than proper checks and balances being placed upon use of force in the process of police work.

If the police forces of the United States refuse to accept such restrictions, then sure, maybe a revolt would happen. And it would be necessary. Because that's bordering on fascist-police-state territory.

The alternative is that they can admit there's a problem, and work with the communities they serve to work out a proper solution, including restrictions and procedures that the community can accept to curb this kind of violence moving forward.

Ferguson, for example, has taken many steps to improve police/community relations. They started a civilian over-sigh committee, they also have another on how to re-build, and encourage businesses to return to the community. Body cams are now mandatory, their is new police training being implemented by the DOJ. Courts are now assessing lower fines, forgiving bench warrants for failure to appear, and allowing people to work off fines, instead of being forced to pay with real money.

This was ALL signed and approved, BEFORE the GJ announcement. The city of STL is also taking steps such as these. Things ARE being done, but because a few don't think it's good enough, or happening fast enough, they are out to seek blood, and it's only ripping the communities who are trying to heal, back apart.

[Booshman]

Yeah, lets go tell that to the families of the dead cops, who by the way, since I know SOMEONE is going to bring up race in this thread at some point, weren't even white. I thought most of the issue was black people being angry at white cops. So let's kill a mexican and an asian, might as well bring everyone into this.

Since black people have been against "Police Brutality" in general for decades (with not all cops being white for decades), and one of them killed two non-white cops, it doesn't take much to figure out that among some of them (black people) there is an issue with "police regardless of race".

[jadedcraze]

Is it acceptable if one of them is someone you love?

Tell me, what did this kid, or his father do to deserve this?

What about Tamir Rice? He doesn't get to open his presents this year.

[Daerio]

Talking about a revolution is pretty mind-bogglingly ridiculous. It's predicated on the idea that cops are going to demand to keep their right to oppress and kill the people they are supposed to protect, rather than proper checks and balances being placed upon use of force in the process of police work.

I agree with what you're saying here, but it seems to me the police need to back down and compromise here first somehow, and I don't see that happening. I see them doubling down and esclating after this. Not that they were really going to compromise to begin with.

[prwraith]

This is a platitude that really doesn't hold up, in practice.

Consider, for instance, the American Revolution.

A fair enough point, though I'd argue that the Revolution was a defensive war with the major initial violent aggression on behalf of the English. Then again I could be wrong.

Your earlier post touches on what's correct though. People are talking as if the entirety of the police force is a seethingly corrupt entity that has no goal past elimination of black people. If this were the case, that it should be removed is obvious.

This is not however the case.

[Belize]

This is a platitude that really doesn't hold up, in practice.

Consider, for instance, the American Revolution. Which wasn't even about oppressive use of force by government agents. It was largely about taxes. And specifically, who got to decide where they got spent.

Well, Colony Era America wasn't exactly a democracy either though. King said "Lol nope fuck you guys". I'm be more inclined to agree if Obama proclaimed himself supreme leader. Until then though, the analogy is tenuous at best.

[Stop Pretending]

What about Tamir Rice? He doesn't get to open his presents this year.

And his killer needs to be brought to justice.

[prwraith]

Do you have anything but the Bible and emotions to back you up on that opinion?

Also, who initiated violence in this video? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_f06VQOkI4

Thomas Jefferson's quote on fear and tyranny is still very applicable today.

You keep mentioning the bible and emotions. If it's emotional to think that what you're saying is idiotic because of a few bad apples on either said, then sure I'm emotional. If that quote comes from the bible then sure whatever, but you know that assaulting the government is going to cause more violence not less.

[Daerio]

Well, Colony Era America wasn't exactly a democracy either though. King said "Lol nope fuck you guys". I'm be more inclined to agree if Obama proclaimed himself supreme leader. Until then though, the analogy is tenuous at best.

So because it's a systematic injustice rather than one man, it should be ignored.

The DAs and the grand juries did, in fact, say, "lol nope fuck you guys" and that's where we are.

And his killer needs to be brought to justice.

You mean the cop who shot him?

[Endus]

I agree with what you're saying here, but it seems to me the police need to back down and compromise here first somehow, and I don't see that happening. I see them doubling down and esclating after this. Not that they were really going to compromise to begin with.

I'm not really saying that the citizenry should back down and compromise. Perhaps accept less in the way of concessions than they might have wanted, if those concessions are still reasonable, at least as a first step, but certainly not to accept any steps back from the status quo, which is already stacked against them.

The police in the USA (speaking broadly) absolutely need to start compromising on some of these things, and giving up some of these powers. They clearly aren't making things "better". They're just deepening the divide.

[Belize]

You're literally describing the actions of fascism and pretending they're a valid argument.

So we shouldn't do anything about it? I don't understand, should government not step in after the killings? It's one thing to protest peacefully, but it's another entirely to act on sentiments like "Kill cops" or whatever the quote was.

I was answering his post that said it was wrong to step up measures in light of violence associated with said protest.