Jump to content

Buffalo PD assault older gentleman, leave him to bleed


Reed83HOF

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Bangarang said:

I have no problem with police accountability. Suspend the cops pending a review/investigation. But to charge them with Assault is a joke and was only done to cater to the mob of people outraged.

 

TBT, that latter is pretty much where I am - not the "joke" part but that the charges are being influenced by politics and public outrage.  The charges came flying out so quickly that I don't understand how there was time for a proper investigation, and I don't feel it's appropriate for Cuomo to weighing in from afar.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do they Know what person turns and hurts them or kills them.  Tough job. 

cops that did George in very bad cops.  
 

People want cops to do the right ting perhaps people should also do the right thing. 

Edited by mead107
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

 

Will there be a police presence?  Bull horns?  Tear gas?

I'm kinda surprised to see there weren't any of those open-carry idiots walking around with assault rifles, like a month ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone up there tell me if the Buffalo Police have actually tried to de-escalate the situation?

I mean, have they tried to come together with the community to show they're "all one", or are they staying hardline?

 

No matter how you feel about the situation, this has given the City of Buffalo a very bad look, internationally, especially with all of those cops resigning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In memory of Jon Stewart in the post above...this was SIX F'n years ago.     And here we are again, with virtually the same cast of jamokes mouthing off about things.    This is what so many protesters are angery about...

 

 

 

 

Edited by Lurker
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bad Things said:

I'm kinda surprised to see there weren't any of those open-carry idiots walking around with assault rifles, like a month ago.

How many buildings looted/burned or cops assaulted by these "idiots"?  Did they fire a shot?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bangarang said:

 

 

And what does it mean to be exempt from bail reform? That doesn’t make any sense.

Currently in new york, people dont need to post bail after getting arrested. The individuals who ran over the officers, had bail set over $100,000. I hadnt hear of anybody in new york needing to post bail in long time. I can assume the charges against them, do not apply to the bail reform set up a couple years ago. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, wagon127 said:

Currently in new york, people dont need to post bail after getting arrested. The individuals who ran over the officers, had bail set over $100,000. I hadnt hear of anybody in new york needing to post bail in long time. I can assume the charges against them, do not apply to the bail reform set up a couple years ago. 


The bail reform took effect the beginning of this year and it’s somewhat false to say that people don’t need to post bail after being arrested. It’s entirely dependent on the crime in which a person is charged with. 

4 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

 

When you said this: 

 

 

Unless I am misreading you, your premise is that the difference in police response to the two groups is understandable due to a 'reasonable belief' that one group may be looting the local target or try(ing) to set fire to city hall. I object to the flippant suggestion that your version, and by proxy the police's, of 'reasonable belief' should be applied unilaterally, as illustrated recently by law enforcement's interactions with the segment of society for whom these protests represent.

 


So you think there should have been more of a uniformed police presence similar to what we’ve seen during the protests that included riots and looting? Do I have that right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I understand that's your viewpoint but I don't understand what you see as hypocrisy.  Is it hypocritical to think that when a citizen who may have broken a law but does not appear to be a violent threat, winds up in serious condition in hospital it's a problems?  Is it hypocritical to think that in trying to defuse protests over the death of a man in custody, lying on the ground after a police officer knelt on his knee for 8 minutes, perhaps using a strategy that results in police tactics of baton-wielding officers whacking protestors over and over in various cities is not the best choice to diffuse tension?  Where's the obvious hypocrisy?  I'm not trying to be a dick here, but it isn't obvious to me.

 

 

Pre-cisely.  You got it.  Someone is upset about Event A, and someone else implies they need to be also upset about Event B or they're somehow wrong - hypocritical, inconsistent, whatevs.  Not the case.  People can be upset about the Buffalo protester and discuss it without expressing equal outrage about any or all other events at the same time.  You can be upset about two brother officers injured by some homicidal ass driving into them without being upset about the two state troopers injured by a brother officer driving into them.  It's not that the other events might not deserve some outrage or upset, it just shouldn't be required.


 

Here’s my beef, people seem to care much more about black lives when they are taken by white cops. 
 

Everyone knows who George Floyd is, do these same people know who someone like David Dorn is? 

 

People get outraged when a white cop kills a black man but stay silent and don’t shed a tear at all the black on black death and violence happening around them on a daily basis.
 

Does anyone want to be outraged at the 90 shootings and 30 deaths that occurred in Chicago last weekend? Do those black lives not matter as much? 
 

You want people to believe your message and invoke real change? Be consistent about it and don’t cherry pick who matters. 

Edited by Bangarang
  • Like (+1) 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bangarang said:


 

Here’s my beef, people seem to care much more about black lives when they are taken by white cops. 
 

Everyone knows who George Floyd is, do these same people know who someone like David Dorn is? 

 

People get outraged when a white cop kills a black man but stay silent and don’t shed a tear at all the black on black death and violence happening around them on a daily basis.
 

Does anyone want to be outraged at the 90 shootings and 30 deaths that occurred in Chicago last weekend? Do those black lives not matter as much? 
 

You want people to believe your message and invoke real change? Be consistent about it and don’t cherry pick who matters. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

People get outraged when a white cop kills a black man but stay silent and don’t shed a tear at all the black on black death and violence happening around them on a daily basis.

 

Whataboutism at its finest.   

 

The protest is not about crime or violence.  Its about the near universality of instances where public servants sworn to protect and serve--who, when they break that faith and do clearly illegal things--invariably are protected by the same justice system that would, under similar circumstances, send a "civilian" away for life.    Especially if the perpetrator is poor, non-white and "not like us."    

 

Crime is always going to be a part of the human condition.   It's a false equivalence to say there is no difference between those who commit crimes--when clearly the one whose oath is to "protect" is a world away in responsibility and duty from the common thug who shot David Dorn.   Or to not acknowledge that the way justice for those crimes is administered is different if you wear a uniform.   

 

This is the sad, frustrating and ultimately intractable reality that America is confronting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

Whataboutism at its finest.   

 

The protest is not about crime or violence.  Its about the near universality of instances where public servants sworn to protect and serve--who, when they break that faith and do clearly illegal things--invariably are protected by the same justice system that would, under similar circumstances, send a "civilian" away for life.    Especially if the perpetrator is poor, non-white and "not like us."    

 

Crime is always going to be a part of the human condition.   It's a false equivalence to say there is no difference between those who commit crimes--when clearly the one whose oath is to "protect" is a world away in responsibility and duty from the common thug who shot David Dorn.   Or to not acknowledge that the way justice for those crimes is administered is different if you wear a uniform.   

 

This is the sad, frustrating and ultimately intractable reality that America is confronting...


You’re being extremely naive if you think this is just about police brutality and not about race.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Just Joshin' said:

How many buildings looted/burned or cops assaulted by these "idiots"?  Did they fire a shot?

 

Where did I imply that they were violent "idiots"?

I only pointed out that they were idiots. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bangarang said:


You’re being extremely naive if you think this is just about police brutality and not about race.

 

It is about race.  That was the "...Especially if the perpetrator is poor, non-white and "not like us" line was about.

 

But it's also is about unequal justice, justice for some and abuse of public trust / responsibility.  Which is why the marches have taken on such a widespread and international tone.

 

In any event, nobody's changing any hearts and minds in this thread.   That's both the problem and the reason why it will never be solved.    OAO...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Bangarang said:


The bail reform took effect the beginning of this year and it’s somewhat false to say that people don’t need to post bail after being arrested. It’s entirely dependent on the crime in which a person is charged with. 

 

You are right. The last 6 months, feel much longer.... lol

Edited by wagon127
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Watch the video.  Assuming it's an accurate translation: Ouch.

 

 

 

Yeah that's one good cop for sure hap

 

But he talks about not hurting protesters , while they're still stoning Christians in the middle East, stoning gays, circumcising women

 

Maybe he should take a firm stance on that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

Yeah that's one good cop for sure hap

But he talks about not hurting protesters , while they're still stoning Christians in the middle East, stoning gays, circumcising women

Maybe he should take a firm stance on that

 

I don't even take the video at face value since I can't translate what he says for myself but I thought it was interesting with the points about "you're wearing a helmet, you have your riot gear, a rock won't hurt you"

 

I think we each are responsible for how we behave in our own sphere of influence. 

 

To me the analogous to what you say would be to say "what about black on black violence in the inner city, gangs and drugs? Maybe they should clean that up before they criticize police."  I don't think anyone believes those aren't problems, but I don't see why one can't criticize (or praise) police while those problems still exist either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...