Jump to content

jbevins

Regulars
  • Posts

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jbevins

  1.  

     

     

    I think the police us of deadly force is defined in various court rulings like graham v. conner. In effect, the courts allow officers to determine what was reasonable, and prosecutors and judges by tradition give way to the officer for the reason of "law enforcement" as a desired societal goal. Ergo, police can pretty much kill people and simply "say" they feared for their safety. In effect, that's the reasonableness test in a nutshell.

     

    That's a wider use of deadly force than citizens enjoy. 

     

    Not at all. In fact, many such cases are tried by juries, so it's the citizens siding with the police.  You can't really get too much more democratic than that, in which case you might have to confess that democracy isn't something you always like or support.

     

     

    I don't get your point.

     

    Are you saying police don't have more lattitude for deadly force than a citizen?

     

     

    Not in the law, they don't.  Maybe they have a bit more "latitude" in the sense that jurors tend to grant deference to officials and tend to require some pretty solid proof before convicting one.  Contrast that with the propensity of jurors to disbelieve thugs and crack-heads (not that they all are), and you get the idea.

     

    The law allows jurors to judge the credibility of witnesses.  The legal standards are the same.

     

     

    How does Graham v. Conner related to police use of deadly force?

  2. jbevins, I think you hold these "iconic people" to some false feeling that they are better than us. You will not find anyone's pictures hanging on the walls of my home outside of my family. I put nobody on a pedestal on Earth, I believe we are all equal. Some people are more successful than others, but somehow they are better than us? ...or held to a different standard? Not in my eyes. Many entertainers such as Queen B and her hubby are icons in the eyes of many youngsters but they are both obnoxious people with limited talent who have spewed hatred for years. Same goes for the idiots like Michael Moore and Sean Penn....these people are delusional.  There are plenty of whacked out Hollywood types that preach getting rid of guns and all that yet they are protected by armed guards. Yep, sounds about right. Do you really believe O is any better than you are I? Wow, I am glad I don't feel the need to praise and follow this bunch of lost souls.

     

    That doesn't sound like you believe we are all equal. Nor did your other posts. Even above you contradict yourself about that.

     

    I didn't say or suggest that Oprah or the first lady were better than me, better than you or better than anyone else. I said they were establishment figures that are well regarded, and that this is the only place I've ever heard them villified as racists. That sounds like one of those Alex Jones conspiracy nut lines, but hey, I'm enjoying the learning, so carry on! I'll get the hang of it!

  3.  

    I think the police us of deadly force is defined in various court rulings like graham v. conner. In effect, the courts allow officers to determine what was reasonable, and prosecutors and judges by tradition give way to the officer for the reason of "law enforcement" as a desired societal goal. Ergo, police can pretty much kill people and simply "say" they feared for their safety. In effect, that's the reasonableness test in a nutshell.

     

    That's a wider use of deadly force than citizens enjoy. 

     

    Not at all. In fact, many such cases are tried by juries, so it's the citizens siding with the police.  You can't really get too much more democratic than that, in which case you might have to confess that democracy isn't something you always like or support.

     

     

    I don't get your point.

     

    Are you saying police don't have more lattitude for deadly force than a citizen?

  4.  

    I'm leaning a great deal about human relations here. I was telling some friends at lunch about how even Oprah was demonized and no one believed me! I had to send him the link! "Oprah Winfrey? GTFOH!"

     

    I personally know people who have been involved in interactions with the O word and the stories are not pretty.  You may be surprised at the revelations especially in a culture that worships wealth  and by extension those with it (or is it the other way around?), but not everyone is.

     

     

    I wasn't surprised by your personal annecdotes, because I don't know you or them. What surprised me was that you would/could call her a classless racist in a forum that nominally precludes that kind of talk. But Mallette informed me it was only a "close call" - so I guess you didn't cross that line.

     

    OTOH, I have a reasonable sensibility as a normal person, and remain surprised by the pervasive attitudes here about citizens normally considered in high regard by the mainstream. That's just my reaction. That's why I said I had stepped on to another planet. I'm not used to hearing Oprah and the First Lady regarded so boorishly.

  5. I think the police us of deadly force is defined in various court rulings like graham v. conner. In effect, the courts allow officers to determine what was reasonable, and prosecutors and judges by tradition give way to the officer for the reason of "law enforcement" as a desired societal goal. Ergo, police can pretty much kill people and simply "say" they feared for their safety. In effect, that's the reasonableness test in a nutshell.

     

    That's a wider use of deadly force than citizens enjoy. 

  6.  

    In other words, there is a basic, fundamental right to kill based on nothing other than the policeman's considerations of fear.

     

    Absolutely!  And the same rules apply to ordinary citizens, too.  The right to legitimate self-defense has to be the most precious right any individual can have.

     

     

    Are you saying it's the same for citizens? All I have to do is say I feared for my life and I can kill anyone I want?

  7. The cops used non lethal action first and tazed him twice, to no avail. He may have been strung out and the taazing had little to no affect. Watching the Alton Sterling video shows me that in fact we have no idea what his right hand was doing. One cop was mounted low on the victim and the perp was trying to buck him off. The cops did pull a weapon out of his right pocket so to me at least, if he was trying to get his hand into his pocket, that could have resulted in an officer being shot. To me that justifies his shooting.

     

    May have been "strung out?" Not according to witnesses. Maybe the cops were strung out?

    He's a "perp?" What was he guilty of? Was he under arrest?

    "...no idea what his right hand was doing."  Maybe trying to protect himself from this onslaught?

    Trying to "buck him off?" Really? How do you know that?

     

    None of that squares with any witness statements. By all accounts, Alton was a guy who was respected and regularly sold CDs in front of this store with the owner's permission. A well liked man.

     

    I'm leaning a great deal about human relations here. I was telling some friends at lunch about how even Oprah was demonized and no one believed me! I had to send him the link! "Oprah Winfrey? GTFOH!"

  8. I've not heard of any studies of serious problems policing Asiatics. They make up about 14% of the US population and take up a tiny fraction of the prison population. I believe they are considered a minority in this country in terms of race.

    Right. My mistake. I should have said "blacks" and not "minorities."

     

    BTW, Banks never redlined "Asiatics", nor did we ever have the equivelent of Jim Crow laws for "Asiatics."

     

    Thanks for catching my error. The studies are about policing of blacks.

  9. Why aren't cops held to this same standard?

    Because the Supreme Court has ruled in so many words, that police have the right to kill anyone who they believe threatens them harm. It doesn't say they have a right to neutralize, stop or deter. It says they have the right to kill. So, if you are going to shoot a guy, you are going to make darn sure he is dead. The couple in a car a few months back had 156 shots fired into the window (best of my memory). In other words, there is a basic, fundamental right to kill based on nothing other than the policeman's considerations of fear.

  10. The idea is that once you utter the word GUN out loud, it triggers a defensive response in the officer putting him on high alert.

     

    Is this at odds with all the new laws encouraging people to carry guns? Police hate to hear "gun" - lawmakers want everyone armed to teeth?

  11. Thanks for the welcome Mallette. I did read the TOS. I can't think of anything I said in contradiction. But I blanched red when reading these two statements made earlier, and the ones about the First Lady. They attempt to describe two of the most mainstream establishment black women as racists, not to mention the rest of the ugly characterization. I said early on that there was a total uniformity of expression here, and maybe because of that, no one sees these kinds of statements as foul balls? I didn't think it would hurt to defend the two women since no one else was going to. What does it mean to "stay clear of racism" then?

     

    She puts people off and it has nothing to do with money, except in her mind. It would be hard to come up with a worse example of a person in any circumstance than her. She embodies classless and racism all in one.

    I remember the Oprah story about her being over in France with an expensive purse or something? Oprah's ego could barely fit inside the door of this shop so she seemed quite happy to bask in this racist plot she stirred up.
  12. Consider this: maybe those platforms are being used to speak the truth.

    About 100% of the academic studies on the subject reveal a serious problem in policing of minorities. Of course people wouldn't hear about that if all they listen to is partisan antagonists.

    The truth is not often pleasant.

    Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

    • Like 2
  13. Public at large doesn't care much about sound Q. Attended a car show recently and they had a thousand watts of the most distorted sound you can get and still be called sound. No one noticed, said anything, complained. Big truck from a commercial PA company and the guy is just sitting there at the controls. I was gonna say something......ah what's the point? I had to steer clear of the speakers.

×
×
  • Create New...