Walter Scott

• Automatik

  

  http://gawker.com/michael-slager-has-an-alleged-history-of-violence-again-1696726367?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
• Belly35

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1720223 wrote:No the problem is murder isn't ok just because "it is what it is".
  
  our entire civilization demands progress to survive... you want to keep living in the same shitty system.

  Never did I make the hint of suggestion that the cop was right ... Wrong as wrong can be...
  
  "civilization demands progress to survive": If we are talking IPad. You have your head up your ass bro. What indication do you have, based on behavior of criminals in the pasted months that by waving the magic Liberal wand of hope and change criminals will not run, shoot cops, fight with officers and stop breaking the laws that millions of America addhere to daily. The old shitty system works, stats
  Laws, procedures, methods and standards don't have to change .... criminal behavior does ( good luck with that )
  Criminals what a lawless society and Liberals want a skewed system of legal confussion...
• HitsRus

  

  However, this line of thinking is so stupid. Cops are not supposed to be able to hand to hand combat everyone. It's super dangerous and sets a horrible precedent. Cops cannot, and should not have to decide on the spot who can hurt them in hand to hand combat and only draw weapons on those they don't think they can "take." This is right up there with shoot the weapon out of his hand type stuff.
  

  Exactly. The real point here is that there is no reason for the cop to use his weapon at all. It was a minor violation, there was no danger to the public real or imagined. If he couldn't catch him or was afraid for his own safety, he had only to get a cohort and go and arrest the guy later at his house. They knew who he was, where he lived, and they had his vehicle.
• bigkahuna

  Automatik;1720253 wrote:Pieces of shit run on just about every episode of Cops. Thankfully the overwhelming majority of officers know how to handle the situation in the appropriate manner.

  Yeah Cops would have been a completely different show. Someone would have been shot every episode.
• Glory Days

  

  Old Rider;1720187 wrote:I think its funny that this cop said he "feared for his life" because the guy was able to get the stun gun. You feared your life?? ***** ass POS!!! Should have chased this guy down, tackled him, knocked him in the head a few times and then cuffed his ass.

  Tasers are most definitely a danger to an officer. They are meant to incapacitate people. Just like a cop uses a taser to control a subject and handcuff them, a subject with a taser can use it against the cop to disarm the cop of his/her gun.
• Glory Days

  

  Zoltan;1720201 wrote:This is getting off topic almost because this cop looks super guilty, and should be charged with murder.
  
  However, this line of thinking is so stupid. Cops are not supposed to be able to hand to hand combat everyone. It's super dangerous and sets a horrible precedent. Cops cannot, and should not have to decide on the spot who can hurt them in hand to hand combat and only draw weapons on those they don't think they can "take." This is right up there with shoot the weapon out of his hand type stuff.

  This. Its not a game of cops and robbers where when its all said and done, both sides shake hands and go home. reading comments sometimes make it sounds like being a criminal and running from or fighting the cops is a sport.
• Glory Days

  

  HitsRus;1720286 wrote:Exactly. The real point here is that there is no reason for the cop to use his weapon at all. It was a minor violation, there was no danger to the public real or imagined. If he couldn't catch him or was afraid for his own safety, he had only to get a cohort and go and arrest the guy later at his house. They knew who he was, where he lived, and they had his vehicle.

  You should never let a criminal get back to his residence. You never know what kind of weapons they have there etc. it creates a lot more an unknown situation. Then you have to call in SWAT when the guy doesn't want to surrender and then people will complain about the militarization of police.
• rydawg5

  Reading through this thread. How does being liberal affect Zwicks thoughts and feelings on this matter?
  
  Wouldn't the posters against Zwick using their logic of "political stance" be a prisoner of the rocks they throw.
  
  A basic math equation would say: Zwick is against the cop because he is liberal therefore Gut would be for the cops, guns, etc because he is conservative.
  
  By your own admission, you are making any of your points invalid based upon your assumed position of what one believes due to their political affiliation.
  
  
  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
• Automatik

  

  Are you new here? Stop making sense, this is the OC.
• Heretic

  

  Automatik;1720461 wrote:Are you new here? Stop making sense, this is the OC.

  Yes, any conversation that can be politarded up will be, no matter how stupid and nonsensical doing so is.
• gut

  rydawg5;1720454 wrote: A basic math equation would say: Zwick is against the cop because he is liberal therefore Gut would be for the cops, guns, etc because he is conservative.

  Well, I'm not a conservative so your basic premise is wrong.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  yes lets remember gut is not conservative. He just hates everything liberal and agrees with everything conservative.
• gut

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1720480 wrote:yes lets remember gut is not conservative. He just hates everything liberal and agrees with everything conservative.

  What conservative values do you think I hold, since you're so observant?
  
  Or save yourself the trouble and don't embarrass yourself yet again. Could it be - gasp - I'm a libertarian? Maybe too complex for you? Another person who struggles with big words?
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  gut;1720482 wrote:What conservative values do you think I hold, since you're so observant?
  
  Or save yourself the trouble and don't embarrass yourself yet again. Could it be - gasp - I'm a libertarian? Maybe too complex for you? Another person who struggles with big words?

  Oh god... it would take hours to dig up all your conservative drivel just from the past election alone. Classify yourself any which way you want. I have no doubt you may side Libertarian. Since Libertarians have essentially no voice when it comes to elections, you always then side conservative. Saying anything else is only lying to yourself.
  
  And yes it's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too complex for me. Your intelligence is a breath of fresh air on this site. We're so lucky to have you here.
• Con_Alma

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1720480 wrote:... He just hates everything liberal and agrees with everything conservative.

  
  Describes me perfectly.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Con_Alma;1720503 wrote:Describes me perfectly.

  
  Really?
  
  I don't agree with everything Liberal. You'd have to be a puppet to side 100% one way or the other.
• Con_Alma

  Not necessarily. I don't agree with all conservatives but do agree with all conservative ideology especially as it relates to social issues. In addition, I think "hate" is probably a gross exaggeration that's used for effect....similar to my line of "describes me perfectly".
• like_that

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1720480 wrote:yes lets remember gut is not conservative. He just hates everything liberal and agrees with everything conservative.

  I could be wrong, but I think gut has expressed liberal social views before.
• sleeper

  

  Gut is definitely a libertarian. Con_Alma wanted Santorum; he is definitely a conservative.
  
  Zwick is just an idiot. A liberal piece of trash.
• sleeper

  

  Heretic;1720474 wrote:Yes, any conversation that can be politarded up will be, no matter how stupid and nonsensical doing so is.

  The reality is, conservatives are more apathetic to social issues while every liberal seems to instantly become a SJW and demand change. I'm all for social progress, treating people fairly, etc; but if you are just going to bitch about social issues all the time without proposing reasonable solutions well you can just go straight up fuck yourself because you are a piece of shit whiner with no value added in society.
  
  And no, raising taxes on the rich to throw money at the problem is rarely a "solution".
• Heretic

  

  sleeper;1720550 wrote:The reality is, conservatives are more apathetic to social issues while every liberal seems to instantly become a SJW and demand change. I'm all for social progress, treating people fairly, etc; but if you are just going to bitch about social issues all the time without proposing reasonable solutions well you can just go straight up fuck yourself because you are a piece of shit whiner with no value added in society.
  
  And no, raising taxes on the rich to throw money at the problem is rarely a "solution".

  That's interesting, as this site is my #1 source for seeing (presumably) white guys constantly complaining about blacks and other groups and how they react to any news/topic that's remotely race related. Or any celebrity who used their forum to speak their views (despite the fact they're not shy about using at least this forum to speak theirs). Oftentimes to the degree they're frothing at the mouth and ranting about "THEY ARE THE ENEMY!!!!" because they're so butthurt about people with differing views being able to express them.
  
  Or are they only social issues when it's the "other side" talking about them?
• sleeper

  

  Heretic;1720565 wrote:That's interesting, as this site is my #1 source for seeing (presumably) white guys constantly complaining about blacks and other groups and how they react to any news/topic that's remotely race related. Or any celebrity who used their forum to speak their views (despite the fact they're not shy about using at least this forum to speak theirs). Oftentimes to the degree they're frothing at the mouth and ranting about "THEY ARE THE ENEMY!!!!" because they're so butthurt about people with differing views being able to express them.
  
  Or are they only social issues when it's the "other side" talking about them?

  The fact that this is national news goes to show it doesn't happen very often. What in the last 2 years we've had 5 black people get shot by a white cop/dude and only 1 actually had any evidence that corroborated something other than the white dudes story? This is a non-issue. Maybe the real issue here is that black people don't respect cops due to a self fulfilling prophecy of pretending cops are out to get them; here's a hint, this isn't the 1950's.
  
  Here's my solution: Instead of black people being taught that cops are racist and they want to shoot you because they are black, we should teach black people that the best way to handle an interaction with a cop is to obey their orders verbatim, and if you feel mistreated you can file a complaint/go to the media to get the issue investigated and resolved. I mean, this is common sense to me but apparently black people just want to blame white people for their own problems rather than accepting responsibility for being completely stupid with cops.
• sleeper

  

  Additionally, I'm all about listening to different views but when the narrative is warped and facts are dismissed to support the narrative my ability to accept their perspective is diminished heavily.
• Con_Alma

  sleeper;1720549 wrote:Gut is definitely a libertarian. Con_Alma wanted Santorum; he is definitely a conservative.
  
  Zwick is just an idiot. A liberal piece of trash.

  You are correct sleeper only I didn't just want Santorum as in past tense...I still do.
• Raw Dawgin' it

  

  rydawg5;1720454 wrote:Reading through this thread. How does being liberal affect Zwicks thoughts and feelings on this matter?
  
  Wouldn't the posters against Zwick using their logic of "political stance" be a prisoner of the rocks they throw.
  
  A basic math equation would say: Zwick is against the cop because he is liberal therefore Gut would be for the cops, guns, etc because he is conservative.
  
  By your own admission, you are making any of your points invalid based upon your assumed position of what one believes due to their political affiliation.
  
  
  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  Math is for poor people.