Killed by police

[GregPersons]

Just now, billsfan1959 said:

And would these civil servants be armed?

 

I looked at the site you linked and most of that already exists. But let's look at just one area that was talked about: domestic violence. I didn't see anything in the "alternatives to policing" that addressed what to do when the neighbors hear the man next door physically beating the hell out of his wife/girlfriend. Who do they call and what is the response?

 

You bring mediators. Why would you need a gun for a two person dispute? Bring a small team of unarmed mediators.  Yes, most of that exists but it is not utilized or funded or directed in the most productive way. The idea is to fund these services with the massive budgets afforded to police. But instead of police behaving like an occupying army,  they would behave like firefighters for civil problems.

2 minutes ago, westside2 said:

He's such an idiot. That must of been before the parties "flipped" lol

 

The parties flipped during LBJ's presidency, when he signed the Civil Rights Ac, which had been led by MLK.

 

There was even a movie about it recently https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the_Way_(film)

[Westside]

1 minute ago, GregPersons said:

 

You bring mediators. Why would you need a gun for a two person dispute? Bring a small team of unarmed mediators.  Yes, most of that exists but it is not utilized or funded or directed in the most productive way. The idea is to fund these services with the massive budgets afforded to police. But instead of police behaving like an occupying army,  they would behave like firefighters for civil problems.

 

The parties flipped during LBJ's presidency, when he signed the Civil Rights Ac, which had been led by MLK.

 

There was even a movie about it recently https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the_Way_(film)

Oh, if Hollywood made a movie about it, it must be true!

[GregPersons]

1 minute ago, westside2 said:

Oh, if Hollywood made a movie about it, it must be true!

 

Yeah, Hollywood made it up. There's no other way to get this information. I just know reading can be challenging for folks here.

[GregPersons]

Just now, Jaraxxus said:

Whatever you do, don't use force!

 

No, you're right. The correct response is to kick the door in and start shooting, ask questions later. Just like da call of doody! 

[billsfan1959]

3 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

You bring mediators. Why would you need a gun for a two person dispute? Bring a small team of unarmed mediators.  Yes, most of that exists but it is not utilized or funded or directed in the most productive way. The idea is to fund these services with the massive budgets afforded to police. But instead of police behaving like an occupying army,  they would behave like firefighters for civil problems.

 

 

Of course, I am sure you are aware that responding to domestic violence calls is one of the more dangerous responses for police, right? So, when your unarmed band of mediators show up and the man confronts them with a gun or a knife, what do they do?

[4merper4mer]

Just now, billsfan1959 said:

 

Of course, I am sure you are aware that responding to domestic violence calls is one of the more dangerous responses for police, right? So, when your unarmed band of mediators show up and the man confronts them with a gun or a knife, what do they do?

Mediate.  Duh.

[billsfan1959]

15 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

You bring mediators. Why would you need a gun for a two person dispute? Bring a small team of unarmed mediators.  Yes, most of that exists but it is not utilized or funded or directed in the most productive way. The idea is to fund these services with the massive budgets afforded to police. But instead of police behaving like an occupying army,  they would behave like firefighters for civil problems.

 

Also, I forgot to ask. When the merry band of unarmed mediators respond and they find the husband has beaten his wife to a pulp:

What exactly are they going to mediate?

I assume they are going to arrest him, right?

What if he refuses to be arrested?

 

Edited June 6, 2020 by billsfan1959

[Big Gun]

2 hours ago, GregPersons said:

 

I'm sorry that reality is sometimes difficult. If you're still struggling with concepts like "white privilege" and "systemic racism" — ie, basic history — then yeah, you're not ready for this discussion. There's plenty of ignorant voices already, yours is not needed. Spend time to read, listen, learn.

 

 

So in his 8 years, why didn't Obama address this concern, or is it only an issue because Trump is president?

[GregPersons]

Just now, billsfan1959 said:

Also, I forgot to ask. When the merry band of unarmed mediators respond and they find the husband has beaten his wife to a pulp:

What exactly are they goiong to mediate?

I assume they are going to arrest him, right?

What if he refuse to be arrested?

 

Again just please preface these with "I have no imagination and cannot think of an answer to these on my own. Please help me." Or at least drop the sarcasm if you want a kinder response.

 

Yes. The mediators would separate a physically abusive husband in this situation. This is why you bring multiple mediators. You would subdue him with minimal violence; outnumbering him should give you enough advantage. You separate them.  And you bring in crisis and relationship counselors. And you make an effort to solve the issue instead of worsening it. 

 

Or, you have the current system, which would address your situation like this — armed cops arrive, write a report, do nothing, and don't return until he's killed her. Great.

2 minutes ago, pop gun said:

So in his 8 years, why didn't Obama address this concern, or is it only an issue because Trump is president?

 

First of all, hello, you're a dumbass and obviously racist so a big ***** you to begin. To answer your question, this isn't a Trump-only issue. Remember Obama's response to Ferguson? It sucked ass. Obama is not helping right now, either. His funded groups are promoting "8 can't wait" — a moderate do-nothing reform that would, again, simply put this issue in a box, put a "we tried" label on it, and hope it doesn't return again next year. 

 

So, when you bold the part that says "systemic racism" you might want to look into what that means. Because your childish assumption that somehow Obama's presidency was going to fix that, just because he's black... I just, I want you to hear me: you are stupid as *****.

[billsfan1959]

Just now, GregPersons said:

 

Again just please preface these with "I have no imagination and cannot think of an answer to these on my own. Please help me." Or at least drop the sarcasm if you want a kinder response.

 

Yes. The mediators would separate a physically abusive husband in this situation. This is why you bring multiple mediators. You would subdue him with minimal violence; outnumbering him should give you enough advantage. You separate them.  And you bring in crisis and relationship counselors. And you make an effort to solve the issue instead of worsening it. 

 

Or, you have the current system, which would address your situation like this — armed cops arrive, write a report, do nothing, and don't return until he's killed her. Great.

 

What if he is armed with a knife or a gun?

Is he not arrested for physically assaulting his wife?

What happens when he or his wife refuse counseling?

[GregPersons]

6 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

What if he is armed with a knife or a gun?

Is he not arrested for physically assaulting his wife?

What happens when he or his wife refuse counseling?

 

If he has a gun, then it is a hostage situation. You call in the hostage specialists. That is your armed team. They act with precision, not blunt force.

Yes, he is arrested.

The counseling would be part of the mandatory punishment for the infraction. If he continues to behave violently, he is removed from society. But rather than throw him in jail and lock away the key, there's money to rehabilitate this person. Does this make sense?

 

At what point would you like to begin admitting this already makes more sense than our current system's methods for handling such a situation? That would be appreciated.

 

Edited June 6, 2020 by GregPersons

[Westside]

24 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

Yeah, Hollywood made it up. There's no other way to get this information. I just know reading can be challenging for folks here.

Racist

[billsfan1959]

27 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

You bring mediators. Why would you need a gun for a two person dispute? Bring a small team of unarmed mediators. 

 

10 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

Yes. The mediators would separate a physically abusive husband in this situation. This is why you bring multiple mediators. You would subdue him with minimal violence; outnumbering him should give you enough advantage. You separate them.  And you bring in crisis and relationship counselors. And you make an effort to solve the issue instead of worsening it. 

 

2 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

If he has a gun, then it is a hostage situation. You call in the hostage specialists. That is your armed team. They act with precision, not blunt force.

Yes, he is arrested.

The counseling would be part of the mandatory punishment for the infraction. If he continues to behave violently, he is removed from society. But rather than throw him in jail and lock away the key, there's money to rehabilitate this person. Does this make sense?

 

Out of curiosity, have you ever had to respond to an emotionally charged, domestic violence situation? Do you have any expertise in domestic violence?

 

I only ask because you seem to be completely ignorant of the dynamics of many domestic violence situations.

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Blacks, yes I see you are blaming blacks. 

 

You don’t see government violence as a very different issue? State sanctioned violence 

Seriously HAHA Gator, are you trying to find the the stupidest and most off base comments possible? Are you actually trying to posit that the black on black crime is state sanctioned violence?

[GregPersons]

3 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

Out of curiosity, have you ever had to respond to an emotionally charged, domestic violence situation? Do you have any expertise in domestic violence?

 

I only ask because you seem to be completely ignorant of the dynamics of many domestic violence situations.

 

No but I was waiting for when you were going to tell me my opinion was unqualified! Honestly I expected it to come a bit earlier. Tell us about your experience responding to those situations. What was your role? What happened? What did you learn?

Edited June 6, 2020 by GregPersons

[SoCal Deek]

4 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

No but I was waiting for when you were going to tell me my opinion was unqualified! Honestly I expected it to come a bit earlier. Tell us about your experience responding to those situations. What was your role? What happened? What did you learn?

You’ve drifted off of your racist rant. You think the police only respond to black domestic violence calls? It’s your position that their tactics are different when it’s a white person who called? I can’t figure out if your fantasyland would be void of police or void of ‘white folk’. Please tell us who you’d eliminate first in your version of utopia. 

[Big Gun]

24 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

Again just please preface these with "I have no imagination and cannot think of an answer to these on my own. Please help me." Or at least drop the sarcasm if you want a kinder response.

 

Yes. The mediators would separate a physically abusive husband in this situation. This is why you bring multiple mediators. You would subdue him with minimal violence; outnumbering him should give you enough advantage. You separate them.  And you bring in crisis and relationship counselors. And you make an effort to solve the issue instead of worsening it. 

 

Or, you have the current system, which would address your situation like this — armed cops arrive, write a report, do nothing, and don't return until he's killed her. Great.

 

First of all, hello, you're a dumbass and obviously racist so a big ***** you to begin. To answer your question, this isn't a Trump-only issue. Remember Obama's response to Ferguson? It sucked ass. Obama is not helping right now, either. His funded groups are promoting "8 can't wait" — a moderate do-nothing reform that would, again, simply put this issue in a box, put a "we tried" label on it, and hope it doesn't return again next year. 

 

So, when you bold the part that says "systemic racism" you might want to look into what that means. Because your childish assumption that somehow Obama's presidency was going to fix that, just because he's black... I just, I want you to hear me: you are stupid as *****.

Just as I thought, there is no rational discussion that can be had with an angry racist black guy! You want whites to see it through blacks eyes, why don't you try and see it through whites eyes. You can't because you're a racist to the core! See ya!

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, GregPersons said:

 

OK fair enough. However you need to understand. This is some ***** that a lot of "well meaning" people are doing, by demanding that the oppressed people do everything for them -- identify the problem, the solution, the means, the funds, the everything, and also make sure it doesn't inconvenience any white people. 

 

So step one is to figure out how to be self sufficient and seek out knowledge rather than demanding it given to you on a platter. Does that make sense? If you have some books you've read or are looking to read, or if you're wondering if this or that article seems to be a good place -- feel free to DM me and I'm happy to steer you on your journey, if you like. 

This sounds almost as if you want other people to solve your problems.

[billsfan1959]

14 minutes ago, GregPersons said:

 

No but I was waiting for when you were going to tell me my opinion was unqualified! Honestly I expected it to come a bit earlier.

 

Actually, I never said your opinion was unqualified. I have been very civil during this discussion and asked legitimate questions. 

 

But now that you bring it up, not having been a law enforcement officer is not what disqualifies your opinion. Your ignorance and your extremism is what disqualifies your opinion.

 

Personally, I think there are many changes that could be made in law enforcement and the communities they serve. There are problems on both sides that need reasonable voices to express and reasonable discussion to solve.

 

You are an extremist. Every post you have written vilifies law enforcement. You want to tear it all down because the entire system is racist and corrupt. 

 

You have absolutely no clue what law enforcement officers do in this country on a daily basis. To you, they are simply armed racists who kill black people.

 

Let me ask you this: When you villify a group of people based on the actions of a few, when you attribute motives and characteristics to an entire group, when you paint an entire group of people with the same brush stroke, aren't you the very thing you are railing against?

 

Edited June 6, 2020 by billsfan1959

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

2 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

This sounds almost as if you want other people to solve your problems.

 

...those issues are insurmountable......how come "killed by police" dominates yet zero mention of "police killed"?....guess they were all deserving.......77 YEAR OLD COP murdered in cold blood, the AFRICAN-AMERICAN citizen included?......sick...VERY sick.....