Advertiser Content
Conversation Between 0 and Hands
1 to 11 of 11
  1. Hands
    November 29th, 2016 1:42 AM
    Hands
    Apologies for keeping you waiting, was on my phone and its hard to write up a proper reply on it, and since you've taken the time to respond properly to me it's only fair I take the time to respond properly to you.

    You talk like a typical right winger, particularly the bit about "flowers who let everyone off" as that is usually a logical fallacy the right throw out in lieu of a more structured analysis of the debate. I can see from our messages here that you do in fact understand the debate and what the (majority of) the left are opposed to.

    I mean of course the police are going to have to use force, thats not the problem. It's the level of force, the reasons they used it and the aftermath that shows a massive issue with police culture in America. Mistakes will be made too (The Tamir Rice mess) but again, accountability was lacking there, even though the actual police force looked to charge their own officers. I don't even think racism plays as big of a part in police brutality as a lot of the left believe. I think a lot of these jerkwads who abuse their power would treat a white person just as badly (BLM mentions this in their goals, that police violence and brutality needs to end against white Americans too) but the system itself is racist. You're more likely to get into trouble for shooting an unarmed, non violent white American than you are if you shoot a black American.

    Ultimately, America needs to train not just their police better, but their judges and legal aides too.
  2. 0
    November 28th, 2016 12:07 PM
    0
    "You don't need to say you're on the right, it's heavily implied through your public statements."
    Sorry, but right and left are simply concepts, and you are grouping me into a stereotype based on specific views that I have. That isn't right, and isn't a good perception to have.

    Down playing Police brutality is something only the Right Wing do for instance. "
    Apparently not only the right wing, since I am not on the right. read ^

    The rest of your points make a lot of sense, and I would like our police to act like that. And maybe they can, but the problem is that few here has an interest in changing the police force.

    See, USA is on a very steep decline. Actually, a lot of the westen world, but mostly the USA. We have too much wrong, and it smells decay to me. The problem is that even If I wish to change something, everyone else wants to do nothing.

    But, I won't go on about that. I do like the ideals and training of the UK, as those police sound like men and women who can get muk done with very little violence, which actually appeals deeply to me.

    Cheers
  3. Hands
    November 28th, 2016 12:58 AM
    Hands
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

    You'd be surprised at just how many guns are actually in Europe.

    You don't need to say you're on the right, it's heavily implied through your public statements. Down playing Police brutality is something only the Right Wing do for instance.

    "It is also usually ineffective" might actually be a culture thing, sure. Australia and Britain put tough (in comparison to America) controls in place and we both saw a noted drop in gun crime, but I suppose the counter to this is we never had such a noted gun culture as you to begin with. It's still pretty easy to get a shotgun here, a lot of people are just not inclined to. People who like shooting tins and targets and crap for a bit of fun and not a massive hobby use air rifles, airsoft guns or CO2 pellet pistols (I think you call them BB guns?) and those are easy to get so people seldom end up bothering pursuing actual firearms.

    Maybe this whole thing comes down to how wildly different our cultures actually are. If the Micheal Brown thing happened here, the cop that decided firing off 12 rounds because his pride was hurt would be doing time for manslaughter and for endangering the public with a firearm.

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/cops-missed-gunman-raoul-moat-1091329

    Here's a good example of what I mean by how the British police work the majority of the time. Moat had killed one person and shot two others, including a cop, who he left blinded. The Police, instead of just shooting him without fair trial or due process, attempted to talk Moat into surrendering, then attempted to disable him with a taser (which missed, likely due to how new and unused the particular model was to the British police). Moat, regardless of their efforts, killed himself anyway. But that's the real difference in training. The police only would of used their firearms, even against an armed and dangerous individual, if that was the last and/or most reasonable option.

    http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/fatal-police-shootings

    Here you can see how few times the Police here have had to resort to fatal force. This doesn't account for every shooting however, as the police will maim or disarm where possible.

    The key differences between our police and your police are training and accountability. I mean if the Tamir Rice thing happened here then you better believe the cop who shot the kid would be in for murder, because our Police are taught that they are enforcers of the law, not above it, not the law itself and certainly not immune to it.
  4. 0
    November 27th, 2016 10:34 AM
    0
    The import and production of firearms is not nearly at the same level in the entire of Europe when compared to the USA.


    I never said I was on the right side, or any side. I don't take overarching sides when it comes to politics, I take specific points.


    Gun control does harm law abiding citizens, in certain ways. It is also usually ineffective, because criminals can get guns here fairly easily, they are mass produce here. To obstruct a law abiding citizen to obtain a gun is against the Constitution.


    My major problem with gun control in general is being placed on a list. If my government knows I have a gun, and they decide to say round up civilians, they will know I have a gun. Its more of a privacy thing to me.


    Many people are ok with such things. Afterally, they are the retards who speak out against encryption when they don't even know what it is or does. They'd be ok with government back doors, to protect us from say terrorists.


    I am not ok with such things. I prefer privacy, and I
  5. Hands
    November 27th, 2016 9:55 AM
    Hands
    What makes you think criminals cant get guns here? Aren't you guys on the right side of the spectrum always saying that gun control only harms law abiding owners?
  6. 0
    November 27th, 2016 9:21 AM
    0
    This is true, but the problem with those cases, like shooting the guy 12 times sounds like bloodlust to me. As I said I the thread, amny people are insane, and while it does take a though background check to get into the police for, it is possible for one to hide their murderous tendencies until they get a chance to show their true colors. Such people should absolutely be persecued to the full extent of the law, and it is a sad system where its covered up. So, what would be your solution?


    You see, guns are allowed in our country with very little effort. One can buy a handgun, rifle, etchere with very little restrictions, while in most of Europe, guns are extremely heavily regulated. Whiles its cool that police in Europe, I assume Britian, can disarm criminals with his a baton, they don't have the problems of guns.


    But, its hard to regulate guns ij the USA, because we have a subculture dedicated to it, and we also have it in our constitution as a right of all citizens to have a gun. Of course, not insane people.
  7. Hands
    November 27th, 2016 2:41 AM
    Hands
    Even with criminals like Brown there is a line. Brown was unarmed, so the cop thought it was appropriate to fire TWELVE shots into the street, with only six making the target. How is that not excessive in your eyes? What if one of those six bullets that missed brown hit someone else? At the range they were at, why did the cop feel it was smart to empty near on the entire magazine? Why did the cop not face any punishment for this?

    I'm not even gonna start with the situations like tamir rice, the pastor who was shot for breaking down (although for a rare change, the cop who murdered him actually faced the law herself) or the dude the NYPD literally choked to death or any of the other numerous cases where the victims were completely innocent.

    That doesn't happen here, our cops are able to routinely disarm dangerous people without killing them, without throwing concussive grenades into groups of unarmed protestors, without shooting 12 shots into a public street at an unarmed felon. Its not hard.
  8. 0
    November 26th, 2016 5:19 PM
    0
    But where does the line of excess police brutality end vs actual justfied force?

    What is excessive in everyday contact vs. not. We can all see that showing up with a swat truck to a protester rally is excessive, but what about other conflicts? What about every black person who gets upset when a cop shoots some black dude "for no reason"?

    Also, someone did in fact say that there should never be any killings ever. That, however, nulls the hardships of their jobs.

    So, where do you think the line is crossed, and what would you do about it?
  9. Hands
    November 26th, 2016 2:51 PM
    Hands
    "fee fees"? Baby, you're the one who's so triggered that he has to keep making up statements because you cant put forward a real argument to existing statements lol.

    No one said there should never be any deaths at police hands, they said there should be no deaths at the hands of excessive police brutality. This isn't a remotely hard concept to understand.
  10. 0
    November 26th, 2016 11:59 AM
    0
    Lol, you're funny. You all care so much about your opinions, and are all asinine, that I thought I would put in actual asinine posts.

    As for the cops thing, those who say there should be no deaths are delusional, hoping for a world in which everything is peaceful. While that's not such a terrible goal to reach for, the outrage towards police disgusts me.

    "Powice shouldn't kill anybody, even ONE death is too much!" This is literally ignoring the real dangers of their job. What type of people do you think police deal with on a daily basis. What kind of assholes do you think are going to pull out a gun or knife on them at the first moment they can?

    So, that person who thinks that police should never use fatal force is damn retarded. Their job isn't a joke, and I am impressed even more people aren't killed.

    Also, If you wanted to discuss this some more, you should make a thread on the round table, which must be very special to you.

    Or, better yet, I can post this post on there for you, at no charge.

    Anyways, I don't mean to hurt your fee fees, as I know you all think your asinine comments must be the truth. Being on this forum, I cannot do outright bluntness, as it would bother you all so much.

    I have nothing against any of you, but most everyone is stuck in their worldview, and refuses to see other views. Me? I can change my view, when evidence is shown. For example, that army of police that was posted is very bothersome, but unfortunately I have no way to control that states government, nor the elections of their officials. But, the news can help in such a case, as it puts pressure on such a force.
  11. Hands
    November 26th, 2016 7:43 AM
    Hands
    "So, if you'd like, you may continue to discuss how police should not use violence, but should instead be flowers who allow anything."

    This is hands down the most asinine post I've ever read on any forum anywhere.

    I mean I cannot fathom how much cognitive dissonance you must indulge yourself in to make a multi-layered complicated discussion about unreasonable force into "SHUD CUPS B OK 2 B VIOLTN 0R SHUD AL B HIPPIES?"

    Maybe the round table isn't the place for you.