What is wrong with America

[SarniaSaint]

Bringing it back on topic, if you do get out of the car, don't go stealing bikes.....

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33545655

 

....ohh, they didn't steal the bikes.....! How many times did the officers shoot this highly dangerous robber, err citizen?

 

Feel free to justify, the use of guns, policing policy or whatever else you can drum up, but would you not at least concede that America has a problem?

 

Oh Boy.........

 

#1 - the cops should be armed tell me why you think they shouldn't be

#2 - all you show to make your point is related to inner city crime ridden neighborhoods

#3 - to repeat myself there is a problem in the inner city neighborhoods not with North America

#4 - if you think that America is all inner city neighborhoods you don't know nothing...... stop thinking that North America is like the uk........ its not.

[SarniaSaint]

But he was obviously about to assault the officers with his hat, so they had to defend themselves.

 

Poor effort 0/10........ do better next time.........you need some lessons in sarcasm.

[SarniaSaint]

Methinks the ONLY circumstances when it is acceptable for the police to use lethal force is when they can observe a suspect with a lethal weapon actually in his/her hands. It is not justifiable to shoot somebody because they are attempting to avoid arrest, neither is a failure to comply with police instructions - such as raising your hands - grounds for deadly force I think.

 

Number of people killed by police in the UK since 1900 = 52

Number of people killed by police in the US during March 2015 = 111

 

Obviously you cant or wont accept there is a difference between policing in North America and the uk.........so fights and stabbings in the uk is fine with no police action but maintaining law and order in North America offends you ............OK (shake my head)

[SarniaSaint]

Yet another person trying to use facts, who fails to understand the issues.

 

Actually you are correct .....lack of understanding and using statistics always does that:)

Edited 17 July, 2015 by SarniaSaint

[badgerx16]

Poor effort 0/10........ do better next time.........you need some lessons in sarcasm.

Do you think the Police in that latest video were justified in their actions ? The video clearly shows that the only thing in the victim's hand was his hat, and he was not making any threatening moves, ( unless you think that the video fails to show the whole 'before and during ' ).

[CB Fry]

Don't you remember you aint debating with me ........but cant stay away can you.

 

Make up your mind....do you want to debate with me or not ???

 

I'm not debating anything with you, except maybe whether or not I'm debating with you.

 

That's been the case for an awful long time now, and remains the case.

[badgerx16]

#2 - all you show to make your point is related to inner city crime ridden neighborhoods

#3 - to repeat myself there is a problem in the inner city neighborhoods not with North America.

You are correct, there is certainly a problem in any area where removing your hat, ( or turning your back on a cop, or being in a car that backfires, etc, etc ), is a capital offence.

[alehouseboys]

]#4 - if you think that America is all inner city neighborhoods you don't know nothing.....

 

But...if "you don't know nothing", you know something

 

You really think that ??? you brits are such dumb f*cks

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Obviously you cant or wont accept there is a difference between policing in North America and the uk.........so fights and stabbings in the uk is fine with no police action but maintaining law and order in North America offends you ............OK (shake my head)

 

You do realise I hope that Judge Dredd and Robocop were fictional characters created to entertain bloodthirsty adolescents, rather than 'role models' a modern police force should seek to emulate? For all your talk of ''maintaining law & order'' but seem incapable of comprehending the basic point that the police shooting unarmed suspects is not necessarily lawful, or very conducive to public order for that matter. I dare say that most on here (but not you obviously) will agree that the recent riots in the USA would seem to prove the latter point conclusively.

 

The police are only Human afterall, so mistakes will sometimes be made unfortunately. However, those charged with UPHOLDING the law must never themselves be placed ABOVE the law because down that road lays the 'police state'. The appalling regularity of Police shootings in the US (which is itself a phenomenon directly related to their deeply dysfunctional gun-control legislation) coupled with the fact that the officers involved invariably seem to 'get away with it' points to a major problem with law enforcement in the US that surely will not end well.

 

It seems to me that any nation that develops a police force that appears to see the public as a enemy to be suppressed, rather than as citizens to be served, is in deep trouble.

Edited 17 July, 2015 by CHAPEL END CHARLIE

[Micky]

Oh Boy.........

 

#1 - the cops should be armed tell me why you think they shouldn't be

#2 - all you show to make your point is related to inner city crime ridden neighborhoods

#3 - to repeat myself there is a problem in the inner city neighborhoods not with North America

#4 - if you think that America is all inner city neighborhoods you don't know nothing...... stop thinking that North America is like the uk........ its not.

 

Oh boy, oh boy, indeed.

 

#1 – At no point have I ever said that the police should not be armed. In fact I am in favour of arming police, and, as has been pointed out by others, this does occur here in the UK. However, arming police is not simply a case of giving them a gun. Police officers are routinely trained in the use of self-defence techniques, issued batons, pepper sprays and Tasers. Do you not agree that perhaps the gentleman who removed his cap could have been dealt with using a little less than lethal force? Honestly.

 

#2 – I take it from your comment then, is that you believe that anybody who lives in the ‘inner city’ is fair game. They are all criminals who deserve a much more robust and draconian level of policing to those people who live in the suburbs or rural areas. It might surprise you to know that here in Southampton we also have ‘inner city’ areas; in fact they have them in pretty much every major city in the world. Living in an inner city area / rough area or any other area that suffers from social deprivation does not give the police the right to routinely execute law abiding citizens. He removed his cap.

 

#3 – And to repeat myself also, there is a problem in lots of inner city neighbourhoods throughout the world (ever been to Glasgow?), but that does not allow other police forces carte blanche to act as judge jury and executioner.

 

#4 – I think it’s time you stopped the childish – ‘you don’t know nothing’ line. We are well aware that America is not like the UK – it is the very point that we are trying to get you to understand. The UK has strict gun laws and legislation that restrict the ownership, issue and use of arms and ammunition in order to have a controlled firearms system. Very few people in the UK will ever have actually come into direct contact with a firearm in their life. In contrast, America has a culture and fascination about guns, where it is routinely accepted to both own and use them – we (the UK and America) are polar opposites in our principles with regard to weapons.

 

 

As you so eloquently keep pointing out ‘us Brits don’t know nothing’, but what I do know is that our stance on gun control is light years ahead of Americas. Even the President has recently pointed to the fact America needs to consider reforms – perhaps he is asking himself, ‘What is Wrong with America?’ You think.

[SarniaSaint]

Do you think the Police in that latest video were justified in their actions ? The video clearly shows that the only thing in the victim's hand was his hat, and he was not making any threatening moves, ( unless you think that the video fails to show the whole 'before and during ' ).

 

That's what wrong with using a video snap shot to show what happened........I don't know what went on before anymore than you do.....so why do you believe that an incomplete video record tells the whole story???

[SarniaSaint]

I'm not debating anything with you, except maybe whether or not I'm debating with you.

 

That's been the case for an awful long time now, and remains the case.

 

well I think you are debating in a subtle way

[SarniaSaint]

But...if "you don't know nothing", you know something

 

I give this a 9/10

[SarniaSaint]

You do realise I hope that Judge Dredd and Robocop were fictional characters created to entertain bloodthirsty adolescents, rather than 'role models' a modern police force should seek to emulate? For all your talk of ''maintaining law & order'' but seem incapable of comprehending the basic point that the police shooting unarmed suspects is not necessarily lawful, or very conducive to public order for that matter. I dare say that most on here (but not you obviously) will agree that the recent riots in the USA would seem to prove the latter point conclusively.

 

The police are only Human afterall, so mistakes will sometimes be made unfortunately. However, those charged with UPHOLDING the law must never themselves be placed ABOVE the law because down that road lays the 'police state'. The appalling regularity of Police shootings in the US (which is itself a phenomenon directly related to their deeply dysfunctional gun-control legislation) coupled with the fact that the officers involved invariably seem to 'get away with it' points to a major problem with law enforcement in the US that surely will not end well.

 

It seems to me that any nation that develops a police force that appears to see the public as a enemy to be suppressed, rather than as citizens to be served, is in deep trouble.

 

Wish you hadn't spent so much effort on that reply............full of misinformed opinions shaped by what you watch and listen to in the uk.

[SarniaSaint]

Oh boy, oh boy, indeed.

 

#1 – At no point have I ever said that the police should not be armed. In fact I am in favour of arming police, and, as has been pointed out by others, this does occur here in the UK. However, arming police is not simply a case of giving them a gun. Police officers are routinely trained in the use of self-defence techniques, issued batons, pepper sprays and Tasers. Do you not agree that perhaps the gentleman who removed his cap could have been dealt with using a little less than lethal force? Honestly.

I don't know the full story of the WHOLE incident do you?? If you do then post it.

 

#2 – I take it from your comment then, is that you believe that anybody who lives in the ‘inner city’ is fair game. They are all criminals who deserve a much more robust and draconian level of policing to those people who live in the suburbs or rural areas. It might surprise you to know that here in Southampton we also have ‘inner city’ areas; in fact they have them in pretty much every major city in the world. Living in an inner city area / rough area or any other area that suffers from social deprivation does not give the police the right to routinely execute law abiding citizens. He removed his cap.

 

Now where did I say that ??? I said that most of the crime is committed in inner city neighborhoods ..........the rest of what you say is just complete and utter crap and you know it

is

 

#3 – And to repeat myself also, there is a problem in lots of inner city neighbourhoods throughout the world (ever been to Glasgow?), but that does not allow other police forces carte blanche to act as judge jury and executioner.

 

This don't deserve a reply

 

#4 – I think it’s time you stopped the childish – ‘you don’t know nothing’ line. We are well aware that America is not like the UK – it is the very point that we are trying to get you to understand. The UK has strict gun laws and legislation that restrict the ownership, issue and use of arms and ammunition in order to have a controlled firearms system. Very few people in the UK will ever have actually come into direct contact with a firearm in their life. In contrast, America has a culture and fascination about guns, where it is routinely accepted to both own and use them – we (the UK and America) are polar opposites in our principles with regard to weapons.

 

OK gonna change it to "mentally challenged"........and I do understand that America is not like the uk........so live in your little brit world and stop judging from your mentally challenged viewpoint

 

 

As you so eloquently keep pointing out ‘us Brits don’t know nothing’, but what I do know is that our stance on gun control is light years ahead of Americas. Even the President has recently pointed to the fact America needs to consider reforms – perhaps he is asking himself, ‘What is Wrong with America?’ You think.

LOL NO

 

Answers above and if you think the uk is light years ahead of North America you are mentally challenged

[whelk]

Methinks the ONLY circumstances when it is acceptable for the police to use lethal force is when they can observe a suspect with a lethal weapon actually in his/her hands. It is not justifiable to shoot somebody because they are attempting to avoid arrest, neither is a failure to comply with police instructions - such as raising your hands - grounds for deadly force I think.

 

Number of people killed by police in the UK since 1900 = 52

Number of people killed by police in the US during March 2015 = 111

 

Loathe to fuel any of Sarnia crazy views but a little naive. Do you imagine what it is like going to most calls knowing there is high chance that the suspect will be armed?

The problem is it is all out of control, and the police turn up often with fear in their eyes, pumped and act heavy handed out of self preservation.

All these examples listed on this thread are horrendous but saying police must observe a weapon is not practical. I have no solutions mind and violence breeds violence and no appetite for anyone to want to give up any weapons that they see as protection.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Loathe to fuel any of Sarnia crazy views but a little naive. Do you imagine what it is like going to most calls knowing there is high chance that the suspect will be armed?

The problem is it is all out of control, and the police turn up often with fear in their eyes, pumped and act heavy handed out of self preservation.

All these examples listed on this thread are horrendous but saying police must observe a weapon is not practical. I have no solutions mind and violence breeds violence and no appetite for anyone to want to give up any weapons that they see as protection.

 

I don't suppose for one minute that anyone on here would claim that police have a easy job - far from it. However, whether it is ever justifiable for the police to shoot someone because they suspect he may be armed depends utterly upon the exact circumstances of the case I think.

 

The recent Azelle Rodney shooting here in the UK is a interesting example. This known ''mid level'' criminal was shot (repeatedly) in the head by a Metropolitan Police (SO19) officer after the car he was travelling in was subject to what is referred to as a planned 'hard stop' procedure. He was given no real opportunity to surrender - indeed he was shot a matter of seconds after the car came to a halt. Although guns were indeed found in the car, I understand there is no evidence that Rodney actually had a gun in his hand at the time. A judicial inquiry deemed this killing to be unlawful, a British jury on the other hand decided to give the officer 'the benefit of the doubt' and acquitted him.

 

Now compare that incident with the video posted by Micky on the previous page. The unarmed suspect is seen standing in the street surrounded by at least two police officers who have their guns pointing directly at him. He fails to follow the officers instructions to raise his hands (because he is drunk no doubt) and as a result of this they decide to shoot him dead. Apparently a US jury acquitted the LAPD officers involved of any crime for reasons that seem utterly inexplicable to me.

 

The key difference here is that the US police officers could see their suspect clearly and might have delayed shooting for a few crucial seconds, while the UK officer had a very obstructed view and had to make a instant decision. I dare say that had the Los Angeles incident occurred in London then a innocent man would probably be alive today.

[badgerx16]

That's what wrong with using a video snap shot to show what happened........I don't know what went on before anymore than you do.....so why do you believe that an incomplete video record tells the whole story???

Do you seriously think that there could be anything missing from that video that justifies him being killed ? If so, what sort of action could it be ?

[CB Fry]

That's what wrong with using a video snap shot to show what happened........I don't know what went on before anymore than you do.....so why do you believe that an incomplete video record tells the whole story???

 

Wish you hadn't spent so much effort on that reply............full of misinformed opinions shaped by what you watch and listen to in the uk.

 

Answers above and if you think the uk is light years ahead of North America you are mentally challenged

A masterclass in rational debate and by no means a retread of the glib responses you always give. No sir.

[Micky]

Answers above and if you think the uk is light years ahead of North America you are mentally challenged

And so that is your considered response is it? The (quite simple) point that I made (amongst many that you just failed to respond to), was that arms control here in the UK is light years ahead of America, and yet you cannot even understand that.

 

Indeed, it would appear that one of us is mentally challenged, but I'm comfortable in the knowledge that it is not me.

 

People are trying to engage you seriously, yet you seem incapable of composing any sort of rational reply when facts are put to you.

 

Do you honestly think that there was something so consequential omitted from the 'cap video' that would've been grounds for 3 policemen to shoot the gentleman 8 times? And do you not also think that if this were indeed the case, that the police would be keen to show this in the video in order to justify their action?

 

Mentally challenged, an accusation you throw around at others, as CB Fry would say, rational debate, try it sometime instead of your flippant, immature diatribe.

 

Sent from my Hudl 2 using Tapatalk

[rpb]

There's a very similar 'debate' in the comments section of this article - http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/20/charleston-south-carolina-shooting-gun-control-reform-myths

 

Elton at least makes a few attempts at explaining why gun control is unnecessary but it all ends up with a comparison with bus plunge deaths in India as a justification!

[Micky]

There's a very similar 'debate' in the comments section of this article - http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/20/charleston-south-carolina-shooting-gun-control-reform-myths

 

Elton at least makes a few attempts at explaining why gun control is unnecessary but it all ends up with a comparison with bus plunge deaths in India as a justification!

Interesting article, which as you have pointed out has generated reasoned debate. I took the opportunity to lift this section in order that Sarnia could enlighten us all with his all knowing wisdom:

 

Myth No3: Gun control won’t stop gun violence

 

There are more than three times as many Americans killed by guns per capita than in any other wealthy country, and more than 10 times the rate in comparable larger countries such as Britain, France and Japan.

 

Many of these countries have similar problems with crime, drugs, urban deprivation and youth violence, others are more peaceful, but there is one simple thing that countries with less gun violence have in common with each other: they have fewer guns.

 

No one can predict the future of a more gun-constrained America with certainty, but*the evidence from dozens of comparable societies*points to a clear causal relationship between access to firearms and how often they are used.

 

 

Given his current track record though, I dread to think of his response.

 

Sent from my Hudl 2 using Tapatalk

[SarniaSaint]

Loathe to fuel any of Sarnia crazy views but a little naive. Do you imagine what it is like going to most calls knowing there is high chance that the suspect will be armed?

The problem is it is all out of control, and the police turn up often with fear in their eyes, pumped and act heavy handed out of self preservation.

All these examples listed on this thread are horrendous but saying police must observe a weapon is not practical. I have no solutions mind and violence breeds violence and no appetite for anyone to want to give up any weapons that they see as protection.

 

This is the about the best response so far ..........I know we don't agree but at least you see the why.........

[SarniaSaint]

I don't suppose for one minute that anyone on here would claim that police have a easy job - far from it. However, whether it is ever justifiable for the police to shoot someone because they suspect he may be armed depends utterly upon the exact circumstances of the case I think.

 

Correct

 

The recent Azelle Rodney shooting here in the UK is a interesting example. This known ''mid level'' criminal was shot (repeatedly) in the head by a Metropolitan Police (SO19) officer after the car he was travelling in was subject to what is referred to as a planned 'hard stop' procedure. He was given no real opportunity to surrender - indeed he was shot a matter of seconds after the car came to a halt. Although guns were indeed found in the car, I understand there is no evidence that Rodney actually had a gun in his hand at the time. A judicial inquiry deemed this killing to be unlawful, a British jury on the other hand decided to give the officer 'the benefit of the doubt' and acquitted him.

 

So if don't agree with the verdict of a trial by jury .........what the hell do you believe in......or are you a one man judge and jury

 

Now compare that incident with the video posted by Micky on the previous page. The unarmed suspect is seen standing in the street surrounded by at least two police officers who have their guns pointing directly at him. He fails to follow the officers instructions to raise his hands (because he is drunk no doubt) and as a result of this they decide to shoot him dead. Apparently a US jury acquitted the LAPD officers involved of any crime for reasons that seem utterly inexplicable to me.

 

Same reply as above

 

The key difference here is that the US police officers could see their suspect clearly and might have delayed shooting for a few crucial seconds, while the UK officer had a very obstructed view and had to make a instant decision. I dare say that had the Los Angeles incident occurred in London then a innocent man would probably be alive today.

 

WOW you know all this as facts....you shoulda gone to LA as a Youtube witness

 

Answers above

[SarniaSaint]

Do you seriously think that there could be anything missing from that video that justifies him being killed ? If so, what sort of action could it be ?

 

Don't know how many times I have to answer this..........but watch the before bit...........OHH you cant can you.........so unless you were there you don't have clue what really happened......and BTW they were acquitted by a jury of their peers ............

[SarniaSaint]

A masterclass in rational debate and by no means a retread of the glib responses you always give. No sir.

 

Bye Fry

[SarniaSaint]

And so that is your considered response is it? The (quite simple) point that I made (amongst many that you just failed to respond to), was that arms control here in the UK is light years ahead of America, and yet you cannot even understand that.

 

Indeed, it would appear that one of us is mentally challenged, but I'm comfortable in the knowledge that it is not me.

 

People are trying to engage you seriously, yet you seem incapable of composing any sort of rational reply when facts are put to you.

 

Do you honestly think that there was something so consequential omitted from the 'cap video' that would've been grounds for 3 policemen to shoot the gentleman 8 times? And do you not also think that if this were indeed the case, that the police would be keen to show this in the video in order to justify their action?

 

Mentally challenged, an accusation you throw around at others, as CB Fry would say, rational debate, try it sometime instead of your flippant, immature diatribe.

 

Sent from my Hudl 2 using Tapatalk

 

I'll ignore the flippant, immature diatribe comment .

 

OK yes the uk is very good at keeping firearms out of the general population but not very good with criminals and terrorists.

I don't know what happened before the incident any more than you do........but you are basing your view on something that was recorded on a smart (lol) phone............strange how the jury acquitted .

OK no more "mentally challenged" or "know nothing" from me ...........if you seriously want a debate I can because I think it needs a serious debate........but if it is continual putdowns and windups I will respond the same.

 

So go ahead ............

[badgerx16]

Don't know how many times I have to answer this..........but watch the before bit...........OHH you cant can you.........so unless you were there you don't have clue what really happened......and BTW they were acquitted by a jury of their peers ............

 

The guy stands at the side of the road; the Police order him to step forward away from the others in his group, he puts his hands on his head, ( presumably he is ordered to ), and then he lowers his arms, spreads them apart with his right palm open and facing forward, and his cap in his left hand. These movements are slow and clear, nothing masked, nothing in any way aggressive or threatening, and clearly he is unarmed. At this point he seems to be asking a cop on his right a question, and then 8 shots are fired. Give us an example of the sort of 'before' that justifies this, given the fact that the crime alleged, and of which he is innocent, is theft of a bike.

Edited 19 July, 2015 by badgerx16

[SarniaSaint]

Interesting article, which as you have pointed out has generated reasoned debate. I took the opportunity to lift this section in order that Sarnia could enlighten us all with his all knowing wisdom:

 

Myth No3: Gun control won’t stop gun violence

 

There are more than three times as many Americans killed by guns per capita than in any other wealthy country, and more than 10 times the rate in comparable larger countries such as Britain, France and Japan.

 

Many of these countries have similar problems with crime, drugs, urban deprivation and youth violence, others are more peaceful, but there is one simple thing that countries with less gun violence have in common with each other: they have fewer guns.

 

No one can predict the future of a more gun-constrained America with certainty, but*the evidence from dozens of comparable societies*points to a clear causal relationship between access to firearms and how often they are used.

 

 

Given his current track record though, I dread to think of his response.

 

Sent from my Hudl 2 using Tapatalk

 

Nothing to dread..........

1st response...........most gun deaths are by side arms i.e. revolvers or pistols.........how do you take those out of peoples hands ???

[SarniaSaint]

The guy stands at the side of the road; the Police order him to step forward away from the others in his group, he puts his hands on his head, ( presumably he is ordered to ), and then he lowers his arms, spreads them apart with his right palm open and facing forward, and his cap in his left hand. These movements are slow and clear, nothing masked, nothing in any way aggressive or threatening, and clearly he is unarmed. At this point he seems to be asking a cop on his right a question, and then 8 shots are fired. Give us an example of the sort of 'before' that justifies this, given the fact that the crime alleged, and of which he is innocent, is theft of a bike.

So why did the jury acquit???..............go on tell me .....cant wait for the non-answer from you

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Answers above

 

You have now made what must be literally HUNDREDS of replies to this thread - all of them along the same lines. This is obsessive/abnormal behaviour that calls into question the state of your mental health. You can rest assured that everyone (and their dog) on here knows by now that you vehemently object to the notion gun-control reform or any implied criticism of US law-enforcement practice. While obviously your viewpoint has garnered precious little (or no) support on here, I think we do all 'get' that.

 

So having successfully gotten your message across (!) can you please explain to this forum what you think you are achieving via this veritable 'campaign' of endless repartition that was not abundantly clear to everyone 40 pages ago?

[saint si]

Nothing to dread..........

1st response...........most gun deaths are by side arms i.e. revolvers or pistols.........how do you take those out of peoples hands ???

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/164402.stm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-180650/Gun-amnesty-nets-40-000-weapons.html

[badgerx16]

So why did the jury acquit???..............go on tell me .....cant wait for the non-answer from you

Don't keep avoiding direct questions ; I asked you to speculate, to give us an example of what might have occurred in the 'before' to justify a death sentence for taking off his cap.

[Wes Tender]

So why did the jury acquit???..............go on tell me .....cant wait for the non-answer from you

 

I'll hazard a guess as to why the jury acquited, based on the seemingly overwhelming evidence of the guilt of the law enforcement officers.

 

Could it be that the jury comprised your family or close personal friends of yours?

[badgerx16]

I'll hazard a guess as to why the jury acquited, based on the seemingly overwhelming evidence of the guilt of the law enforcement officers.

 

Could it be that the jury comprised your family or close personal friends of yours?

 

:lol:

[whelk]

The master race

[Verbal]

Here's the go-to reference - the only comprehensive one I've found - for police shootings in the US.

 

The death toll is horrifying.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database

[rpb]

Here's the go-to reference - the only comprehensive one I've found - for police shootings in the US.

 

The death toll is horrifying.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database

 

When you click on their picture, it gives an account of the shooting. Some of those people were very unlucky to be living in the USA (e.g. Autumn Steele Jan 6th)!

[badgerx16]

Here's the go-to reference - the only comprehensive one I've found - for police shootings in the US.

 

The death toll is horrifying.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database

 

I'm sure Sarnie will find ways to justify it all.

[Micky]

Here's the go-to reference - the only comprehensive one I've found - for police shootings in the US.

 

The death toll is horrifying.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database

 

Great resource Verbal. You would think that that one page alone would be enough to convince the most blinkered of people that reform is a must, wouldn't you. And yet it just goes on, and on, and on - the senseless killing. I've only checked out a few, but most appear to be unarmed at the time of the shooting as well.

 

Whilst I find it absolutely abhorrent that supposedly intelligent people cannot see the destructive nature caused by their current love of weapons, I also find it immensely sad.

 

I think I'm probably going to cease posting here for a while now. Having seen the current stats - I don't feel the need to justify my stance to Sarnia any further.

[SarniaSaint]

You have now made what must be literally HUNDREDS of replies to this thread - all of them along the same lines. This is obsessive/abnormal behaviour that calls into question the state of your mental health. You can rest assured that everyone (and their dog) on here knows by now that you vehemently object to the notion gun-control reform or any implied criticism of US law-enforcement practice. While obviously your viewpoint has garnered precious little (or no) support on here, I think we do all 'get' that.

That's your opinion which you keep on TRYING to ram down my throat..........just because I have a better understanding of what the real situation is than you will ever have ............but keep living in your superior opinion of yourselves in a second rate country on a tiny island that no one in the rest of the world takes seriously.

 

So having successfully gotten your message across (!) can you please explain to this forum what you think you are achieving via this veritable 'campaign' of endless repartition that was not abundantly clear to everyone 40 pages ago?

 

I came in peace last night but said I would respond to any insults/windups etc. . Who the F*ck do you think you are to question my mental state???

OK you got the reaction from me you wanted..........will keep replying to you all the time you act like a c*nt .

[SarniaSaint]

Don't keep avoiding direct questions ; I asked you to speculate, to give us an example of what might have occurred in the 'before' to justify a death sentence for taking off his cap.

 

Speculation or in your case opinion is not evidence ..........obviously the jury had more facts........unless you want guilty by smartphone .......are you winding me up or just ...........

[SarniaSaint]

I'll hazard a guess as to why the jury acquited, based on the seemingly overwhelming evidence of the guilt of the law enforcement officers.

 

Could it be that the jury comprised your family or close personal friends of yours?

 

Nope live in another country and 3000 miles away.

[SarniaSaint]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/164402.stm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-180650/Gun-amnesty-nets-40-000-weapons.html

 

MMMMM ........cant you find anything from North America.........small country, small minds

[SarniaSaint]

The master race

 

**** poor effort should have saved your time

[SarniaSaint]

When you click on their picture, it gives an account of the shooting. Some of those people were very unlucky to be living in the USA (e.g. Autumn Steele Jan 6th)!

 

I'm sure Sarnie will find ways to justify it all.

 

Hey just think how lucky you all are living in the uk with a Nazi Royal Family ..............

[BlakeySFC]

I think Sarnia is actually Eric Cartman from South Park.

[SarniaSaint]

Great resource Verbal. You would think that that one page alone would be enough to convince the most blinkered of people that reform is a must, wouldn't you. And yet it just goes on, and on, and on - the senseless killing. I've only checked out a few, but most appear to be unarmed at the time of the shooting as well.

 

Whilst I find it absolutely abhorrent that supposedly intelligent people cannot see the destructive nature caused by their current love of weapons, I also find it immensely sad.

 

I think I'm probably going to cease posting here for a while now. Having seen the current stats - I don't feel the need to justify my stance to Sarnia any further.

 

Thought you wanted a meaningful debate??...........guess not ....so do what the brits do best......run away and tell yourself how great you are

[SarniaSaint]

I think Sarnia is actually Eric Cartman from South Park.

 

Never seen it so explain.............

[badgerx16]

Speculation or in your case opinion is not evidence ..........obviously the jury had more facts........unless you want guilty by smartphone .......are you winding me up or just ...........

All I want you to do is give an example of the sort of thing that might have happened to make the police feel they were justified in their actions. I'm not asking you to provide concrete proof, or the missing 'before' bit of the video.

Surely that's not too difficult given the supposedly superior nature of your 'Canuck' brain ?